Category: military

  • Listen to a reading of this article:

    An article by The Washington Post titled “Pentagon looks to restart top-secret programs in Ukraine” contains some interesting information about what US special ops forces were doing in Ukraine in the lead-up to the Russian invasion last year, and what they are slated to be doing there in the future. 

    “The Pentagon is urging Congress to resume funding a pair of top-secret programs in Ukraine suspended ahead of Russia’s invasion last year, according to current and former U.S. officials,” writes the Post’s Wesley Morgan. “If approved, the move would allow American Special Operations troops to employ Ukrainian operatives to observe Russian military movements and counter disinformation.”

    Much further down in the article we learn the specifics of what those two top-secret programs were. One of them entailed US commandos sending Ukrainian operatives “on surreptitious reconnaissance missions in Ukraine’s east” to collect intelligence on Russia. The other entailed secretly administering online propaganda, though of course The Washington Post does not describe it as such.

    “We had people taking apart Russian propaganda and telling the true story on blogs,” WaPo was told by a source described as “a person in the Special Operations community.”

    US special ops forces “employing Ukrainian operatives” to “take apart Russian propaganda” and “tell the true story on blogs” is just US special ops forces administering US propaganda online. Whether or not they actually see themselves as “telling the true story” or “taking apart Russian propaganda” does not change the fact that they are administering US government propaganda. A government circulating media which advances its information interests is precisely the thing that state propaganda is.

    The US government is theoretically prohibited from directly administering propaganda to its own population (though even that line has been deliberately eroded in recent years with measures like the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act and US government infiltration of the mass media and Silicon Valley), but there’s nothing stopping the funding and directing of foreign bodies to circulate propaganda on the internet, which has no national borders. Back when US propaganda was limited to old media like the CIA’s Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia it was possible to claim that the propaganda was solely being targeted at the populations where that media was broadcast, but propaganda circulated online will necessarily trickle over everywhere, including to US audiences.

    The Washington Post explains that these secret programs were discontinued ahead of the Russian invasion last year because a stipulation in the 2018 NDAA law which permitted their funding forbids their use during a “traditional armed conflict,” so the Pentagon is working to persuade congress to repeal that condition. Part of its sales pitch to congress to get these secret operations restarted is that they will be “what the U.S. military calls ‘non-kinetic’ — or nonviolent — missions,” which the administering of propaganda would certainly qualify as.

    As we discussed recently, it’s very silly that there’s a major push in the US power alliance to begin administering more government propaganda in order to “counter Russian propaganda” when Russian propaganda has no meaningful influence in the western world. Before RT was shut down it was drawing just 0.04 percent of the UK’s total TV audience. The much-touted Russian election interference campaign on Facebook was mostly unrelated to the election and affected “approximately 1 out of 23,000 pieces of content” according o Facebook, while research by New York University into Russian trolling behavior on Twitter in the lead-up to the 2016 election found “no evidence of a meaningful relationship between exposure to the Russian foreign influence campaign and changes in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.” A study by the University of Adelaide found that despite all the warnings of Russian bots and trolls following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the overwhelming majority of inauthentic behavior on Twitter during that time was anti-Russian in nature.

    In reality, this push we’ve been seeing to pour more and more energy into propaganda, censorship, and other forms of narrative control has nothing to do with “taking apart Russian propaganda” and everything to do with suppressing dissent. The US empire has been frantically ramping up propaganda and censorship because the “great power competition” it has been preparing against Russia and China is going to require economic warfare, massive military spending, and nuclear brinkmanship that no one would consent to without lots of manipulation. Nobody’s going to consent to being made poorer, colder, and less safe over some global power struggle that doesn’t benefit them unless that consent is actively manufactured.

    That’s why the media have been acting so weird lately, that’s why dissident voices are getting harder and harder to find online, that’s the purpose of the new “fact-checking” industry and other forms of narrative control, and that’s why the Pentagon wants congressional funding for its propaganda operations in Ukraine. The fact that the empire’s “great power competition” happens to be occurring at the same time as widespread access to the internet means that drastic measures must be made to ensure its information dominance so it can march the public into playing along with this agenda. The more desperate our rulers grow to secure unipolar planetary domination, the more important controlling the narrative becomes.

    ___________________

    My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on FacebookTwitterSoundcloud or YouTube, throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fiPatreon or Paypal, or buying an issue of my monthly zine. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my husband Tim Foley.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    Feature image via Adobe Stock.

    This post was originally published on Caitlin Johnstone.

  • American and German tanks are now headed to Ukraine, a sign that this conflict is going to be escalating in a dangerous way. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. Transcript: *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos. Mike Papantonio: Hi, I’m Mike Papantonio and this is America’s Lawyer. The United […]

    The post Zelensky Turns To US & Germany To Escalate War With Russia appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • By Finau Fonua and Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific journalists

    A researcher at Human Rights Watch in Jakarta is calling for the immediate release of the six hostages — including a New Zealand pilot — being held by a rebel group in Indonesia’s Papua region.

    The rebels in Highlands Papua are threatening to execute Susi Air pilot Phillip Mehrtens if their demands are not met.

    Five other people are also believed to have been taken hostage in the attack.

    The West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) has posted an ultimatum on social media demanding Jakarta negotiate with them over independence for the region.

    “Pilot is still alive and he will be held hostage for negotiations with Jakarta, if Jakarta is obstinate, then the pilot will be executed,” the statement read.

    “We will take the New Zealand citizen pilot as hostage and we are waiting for accountability from the Australian government, the New Zealand government, the European Union governments, and the United Nations, because for 60 years these countries have supported Indonesia to kill Indigenous Papuans.”

    Researcher Andreas Harsono knows the main spokesperson of the rebel group, Sebby Sambom, after decades of research in the field.

    Personal appeal
    He made a call to him personally to let the hostages go.

    “I call on this group to immediately release all of the hostages including the pilot — it is a crime to kidnap anyone including this pilot,” he told RNZ Pacific.

    “I do not know how to measure the seriousness of such a threat but this is a hostage situation, things could be out of control. So the best way is to negotiate and ask them to release the pilot.”

    Andreas Harsono
    Human rights researcher Andreas Harsono . . . “The best way is to negotiate and ask [the rebels] to release the pilot.” Image: Human Rights Watch/RNZ Pacific

    Harsono noted the difficulties for New Zealand attempting to negotiate with the group, particularly given their demands.

    “I don’t think it is easy or even internationally accepted to pressure the New Zealand government to negotiate for West Papuan independence from Indonesia,” he said.

    “It is way too complicated for any country in the world, including New Zealand, to negotiate the independence of this particular territory. But, of course, the Papuan people have suffered a lot and the Indonesian government should do more to end impunity and human rights abuses in West Papua.

    “But this is a hostage situation. The most important thing is to call on this group to immediately and unconditionally release all of the hostages, including the New Zealand pilot.”

    Very remote region
    Harsono said he did not know whether the passengers had been taken hostage, nor did he know if they were indigenous Papuans.

    “The area is very remote, only certain people go there, mainly construction workers, and there were killings against Indonesian workers back in 2018,” he said.

    Indonesian authorities say they are facing difficulties locating Merhtens because of the lack of telecommunications facilities in Paro district and the absence of any Indonesian military or police post in the area.

    Jubi News quotes Papua Police spokesperson Ignatius Benny Ady Prabowo, saying they were continuing to track the whereabouts of Mehrtens and were preparing to go to Paro district.

    He said that before the burning of the plane, rumours had been circulating that a rebel group had threatened 15 construction workers who were building a health centre in the district.

    New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Chris Hipkins, told Radio New Zealand: “The New Zealand embassy in Indonesia is working on the case.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Kate Green , RNZ News journalist

    A former New Zealand pilot says flying for an Indonesian airline can be dangerous, and those who do so are warned to take precautions in Papua.

    This comes it was reported last night that a New Zealander, working as a pilot for Susi Air, was taken hostage by pro-independence fighters in West Papua.

    Reuters reported that the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) claimed responsibility for the attack, saying the pilot would not be released until the Indonesian government acknowledged the independence of West Papua.

    The pilot was identified by Reuters as Captain Philip Merthens.

    It is still unclear what happened to the five passengers reportedly on board, but the plane is said to have been set alight by the fighters.

    Prime Minister Chris Hipkins told RNZ today that New Zealand officials in Indonesia were working on the case.

    He said while standard practice was to give hostage situations minimal airtime, he could confirm the New Zealand Embassy was aware of the situation, and he would be receiving a full briefing.

    Support for family
    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said the New Zealand Embassy was providing consular support to the family, but for privacy reasons it would not be commenting further.

    A former New Zealand pilot, who flew for Susi Air for just over a year ending in 2017, said pilots were warned by the airline to take precautions in Papua — things such as keeping a low profile, travelling in groups, finding a driver to take them around, and not leaving the compound at night.

    Susi Air was known for flying government-commissioned “perintis flights” — pioneer flights — carrying mostly freight to remote areas of Indonesia, he said.

    These were subsidised by the Indonesian government, intended to open up regional development.

    Susi Air was founded by a former Indonesian Fisheries Minister, Susi Pudjiastuti.

    All of this combined to make Susi Air near-synonymous with the Indonesian government.

    The pilot who spoke to RNZ said the airline still ran the largest fleet of passenger-carrying Cessna Caravans in the world, and flew all around the Indonesian islands, including to Papua.

    Mostly freight
    Susi Air flights carried mostly freight, flying from tiny regional towns into main centres, picking up coffee beans, sugar, rice, and bringing in daily goods like washing powder

    According to online reports, including aviation-safety.net, the plane flown by Captain Merthens was a Pilatus Porter, which only requires one pilot — unlike the Cessna Caravans, which the pilot said was required to be flown by two people at Susi Air.

    The pilot said it was relatively common for foreign pilots to work for Susi Air. Those wanting to get more hours under their belt to be considered for a commercial airline back home would go to Indonesia to do so.

    The situation within the country was tense, but most pilots saw it as part of the job.

    “Most are just there to get their hours up and get out,” he said.

    Since the region was brought under Indonesian control in 1969, there has been a low-level struggle for independence with the conflict escalating further from 2018.

    ‘Needlessly cruel’
    “The smaller islands are being forced to align with a culture established in Jakarta,” the pilot said, and the Indonesian military had been “needlessly cruel and violent” in its oppression of the West Papuans.

    As a white foreigner working for the Indonesian state, it was conceivable that Captain Merthens was in real danger — foreigners were, with some frequency, seen as pawns in this way, he said.

    He said it was almost certain that the Indonesian government would not give in to the demands of the pro-independence rebels.

    He had also heard reports of an aircraft being shot at while departing Papua, with bullets found lodged in the airframe under the pilot’s seat.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

  • China has accused the United States of overreacting after President Joe Biden ordered a suspected spy balloon shot down off the coast of South Carolina on Sunday. China maintains the balloon, first spotted over U.S. airspace last week, was a civilian aircraft blown off course. The U.S. and China have been conducting surveillance on each other for years using spy satellites, hacking and other means.

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Julian Assange is still facing extradition and charges of violating the Espionage Act for exposing the US military’s war crimes. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. Transcript: *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos. Mike Papantonio: Julian Assange is still facing extradition and charges of violating the Espionage Act for exposing […]

    The post Assange Conviction Would Be Death Blow To Journalism appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • America’s Lawyer E37: The United States and Germany are now escalating the conflict in Ukraine by sending Tanks to the country. We’ll explain why this development is NOT something to celebrate. A Republican senator has introduced a bill called the Pelosi Act that would ban members of Congress from owning and selling stocks. And Democrats […]

    The post Biden Inches Us Closer To World War III appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • Airstrikes ordered against civilian targets, destruction of thousands of buildings, millions displaced, nearly 3000 civilians murdered, more than 13,000 jailed, the country’s independent media banished, and the country locked in a deadly nationwide civil war. Myanmar civilians now ask what else must happen before they receive international support in line with Ukraine, writes Phil Thornton.

    SPECIAL REPORT: By Phil Thornton

    In the two years since Myanmar’s military seized power from the country’s elected lawmakers it has waged a war of terror against its citizens — members of the Civil Disobedience Movement, artists, poets, actors, politicians, health workers, student leaders, public servants, workers, and journalists.

    The military-appointed State Administration Council amended laws to punish anyone critical of its illegal coup or the military. International standards of freedoms — speech, expression, assembly, and association were “criminalised”.

    The Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), reported as of 30 January 2023, the military killed 2901 people and arrested another 17,492 (of which 282 were children), with 13,719 people still in detention.

    One hundred and forty three people have been sentenced to death and four have been executed since the military’s coup on 1 February 2021. Of those arrested, 176 were journalists and as many as 62 are still in jail or police detention.

    The Committee to Protect Journalists ranks Myanmar as the world’s second-highest jailers of journalists. Fear of attacks, harassment, intimidation, censorship, detainment, and threats of assassination for their reporting has driven journalists and media workers underground or to try to reach safety in neighbouring countries.

    Journalist Ye Htun Oo has been arrested, tortured, received death threats, and is now forced to seek safety outside of Myanmar. Ye Htun spoke to the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) of his torture, jailing and why he felt he had no choice, but to leave Myanmar for the insecurity of a journalist in exile.

    They came for me in the morning
    “I started as a journalist in 2007 but quit after two years because of the difficulty of working under the military. I continued to work, writing stories and poetry. In 2009 I restarted work as a freelance video and documentary maker.”

    Ye Htu said making money from journalism in Myanmar had never been easy.

    “I was lucky if I made 300,000 kyat a month (about NZ$460) — it was a lot of work, writing, editing, interviewing and filming.”

    Ye Htun’s hands, fingers and thin frame twist and turn as he takes time to return to the darkness of the early morning when woken by police and military knocking on his front door.

    “It was 2 am, the morning of 9 October 2021. We were all asleep. The knocking on the door was firm but gentle. I opened the door. Men from the police and the military’s special media investigation unit stood there — no uniforms. They’d come to arrest me.”

    Ye Htun links the visit of the police and army to his friend’s arrest the day before.

    “He had my number on his phone and when questioned told them I was a journalist. I hadn’t written anything for a while. The only reason they arrested me was because I was identified as a journalist — it was enough for them. The military unit has a list of journalists who they want to control, arrest, jail or contain.”

    Ye Htun explains how easy it is for journalists to be arrested.

    “When they arrest people…if they find a reference to a journalist or a phone number it’s enough to put you on their list.”

    After the coup, Ye Htun continued to report.

    “I was not being paid, moving around, staying in different places, following the protests. I was taking photos. I took a photo of citizens arresting police and it was published. This causes problems for the people in the photo. It also caused some people to regard me and journalists as informers — we were now in a hard place, not knowing what or who we could photograph. I decided to stop reporting and made the decision to move home. That’s when they came and arrested me.”

    In the early morning before sunrise, the police and military removed Ye Htun from his home and family and took him to a detention cell inside a military barracks.

    “They took all my equipment — computer, cameras, phone, and hard disks. The men who arrested and took me to the barracks left and others took over. Their tone changed. I was accused of being a PDF (People’s Defence Force militia).

    “Ye Htun describes how the ‘politeness’ of his captors soon evaporated, and the danger soon became a brutal reality. They started to beat me with kicks, fists, sticks and rubber batons. They just kept beating me, no questions. I was put in foot chains — ankle braces.”

    The beating of Ye Htun would continue for 25 days and the uncertainty and hurt still shows in his eyes, as he drags up the details he’s now determined to share.

    “I was interrogated by an army captain who ordered me to show all my articles — there was little to show. They made me kneel on small stones and beat me on the body — never the head as they said, ‘they needed it intact for me to answer their questions’”.

    Ye Htun explained it wasn’t just his assigned interrogators who beat or tortured him.

    “Drunk soldiers came regularly to spit, insult or threaten me with their guns or knives.”

    Scared, feared for his life
    Ye Htun is quick to acknowledge he was scared and feared for his life.

    “I was terrified. No one knew where I was. I knew my family would be worried. Everyone knows of people being arrested and then their dead, broken bodies, missing vital organs, being returned to grieving families.”

    After 25 days of torture, Ye Htun was transferred to a police jail.

    “They accused me of sending messages they had ‘faked’ and placed on my phone. I was sentenced to two years jail on 3rd November — I had no lawyer, no representative.”

    Ye Htun spoke to political prisoners during his time in jail and concluded many were behind bars on false charges.

    “Most political prisoners are there because of fake accusations. There’s no proper rule of law — the military has turned the whole country into a prison.”

    Ye Htun served over a year and five months of his sentence and was one of six journalists released in an amnesty from Pyay Jail on 4 January 2023.

    Not finished torturing
    Any respite Ye Htun or his family received from his release was short-lived, as it became apparent the military was not yet finished torturing him. He was forced to sign a declaration that if he was rearrested he would be expected to serve his existing sentence plus any new ones, and he received death threats.

    Soon after his release, the threats to his family were made.

    “I was messaged on Facebook and on other social media apps. The messages said, ‘don’t go out alone…keep your family and wife away from us…’ their treats continued every two or three days.”

    Ye Htun and his family have good cause to be concerned about the threats made against them. Several pro-military militias have openly declared on social media their intention against those opposed to the military’s control of the country.

    A pro-military militia, Thwe Thauk Apwe (Blood Brothers), specialise in violent killings designed to terrorise.

    Frontier Magazine reported in May 2022 that Thwe Thauk Apwe had murdered 14 members of the National League of Democracy political party in two weeks. The militia uses social media to boast of its gruesome killings and to threaten its targets — those opposed to military rule — PDF units, members of political parties, CDM members, independent media outlets and journalists.

    Ye Htun said fears for his wife and children’s safety forced him to leave Myanmar.

    “I couldn’t keep putting them at risk because I’m a journalist. I will continue to work, but I know I can’t do it in Myanmar until this military regime is removed.”

    Air strikes target civilians – where’s the UN?
    Award-winning documentary maker and artist, Sai Kyaw Khaing, dismayed at the lack of coverage by international and regional media on the impacts of Myanmar’s military aerial strikes on civilian targets, decided to make the arduous trip to the country’s northwest to find out.

    In the two years since the military regime took illegal control of the country’s political infrastructure, Myanmar is now engaged in a brutal, countrywide civil war.

    Civilian and political opposition to the military coup saw the formation of People Defence Force units under the banner of the National Unity Government established in April 2021 by members of Parliament elected at the 2020 elections and outlawed by the military after its coup.

    Thousands of young people took up arms and joined PDF units, trained by Ethnic Armed Organisations, to defend villages and civilians and fight the military regime. The regime vastly outnumbered and outmuscled the PDFs and EAOs with its military hardware — tanks, heavy artillery, helicopter gunships and fighter jets.

    Sai Kyaw contacted a number of international media outlets with his plans to travel deep inside the conflict zone to document how displaced people were coping with the airstrikes and burning of their villages and crops.

    Sai Kyaw said it was telling that he has yet to receive a single response of interest from any of the media he approached.

    “What’s happening in Myanmar is being ignored, unlike the conflict in Ukraine. Most of the international media, if they do report on Myanmar, want an ‘expert’ to front their stories, even better if it’s one of their own, a Westerner.”

    Deadly strike impact
    Sai Kyaw explains why what is happening on the ground needs to be explained — the impacts of the deadly airstrikes on the lives of unarmed villagers.

    “My objective is to talk to local people. How can they plant or harvest their crops during the intense fighting? How can they educate their kids or get medical help?

    “Thousands of houses, schools, hospitals, churches, temples, and mosques have been targeted and destroyed — how are the people managing to live?”

    Sai Kyaw put up his own money to finance his trip to a neighbouring country where he then made contact with people prepared to help him get to northwestern Myanmar, which was under intense attacks from the military regime.

    “It took four days by motorbike on unlit mountain dirt tracks that turned to deep mud when it rained. We also had to avoid numerous military checkpoints, military informers, and spies.”

    Sai Kyaw said that after reaching his destination, meeting with villagers, and witnessing their response to the constant artillery and aerial bombardments, their resilience astounded him.

    “These people rely on each other, when they’re bombed from their homes, people who still have a house rally around and offer shelter. They don’t have weapons to fight back, but they organise checkpoints managed by men and women.”

    Sai Kyaw said being unable to predict when an airstrike would happen took its toll on villagers.

    Clinics, schools bombed
    “You don’t know when they’re going to attack — day or night — clinics, schools, places of worship — are bombed. These are not military targets — they don’t care who they kill.”

    Sai Kyaw witnessed an aerial bombing and has the before and after film footage that shows the destruction. Rows of neat houses, complete with walls intact before the air strike are left after the attack with holes a car could drive through.

    “The unpredictable and indiscriminate attacks mean villagers are unable to harvest their crops or plant next season’s rice paddies.”

    Sai Kyaw is concerned that the lack of aid getting to the people in need of shelter, clothing, food, and medicine will cause a large-scale humanitarian crisis.

    “There’s no sign of international aid getting to the people. If there’s a genuine desire to help the people, international aid groups can do it by making contact with local community groups. It seems some of these big international aid donors are reluctant to move from their city bases in case they upset the military’s SAC [State Administration Council].”

    At the time of writing Sai Kyaw Khaing has yet to receive a reply from any of the international media he contacted.

    It’s the economy stupid
    A veteran Myanmar journalist, Kyaw Kyaw*, covered a wide range of stories for more than 15 years, including business, investment, and trade. He told IFJ he was concerned the ban on independent media, arrests of journalists, gags and access restrictions on sources meant many important stories went unreported.

    “The military banning of independent media is a serious threat to our freedom of speech. The military-controlled state media can’t be relied on. It’s well documented, it’s mainly no news or fake news overseen by the military’s Department of Propaganda.”

    Kyaw lists the stories that he explains are in critical need of being reported — the cost of consumer goods, the collapse of the local currency, impact on wages, lack of education and health care, brain drain as people flee the country, crops destroyed and unharvested and impact on next year’s yield.

    Kyaw is quick to add details to his list.

    “People can’t leave the country fast enough. There are more sellers than buyers of cars and houses. Crime is on the rise as workers’ real wages fall below the poverty line. Garment workers earned 4800 kyat, the minimum daily rate before the military’s coup. The kyat was around 1200 to the US dollar — about four dollars. Two years after the coup the kyat is around 2800 — workers’ daily wage has dropped to half, about US$2 a day.”

    Kyaw Kyaw’s critique is compelling as he explains the cost of everyday consumer goods and the impact on households.

    “Before the coup in 2021, rice cost a household, 32,000 kyat for around 45kg. It is now selling at 65,000 kyat and rising. Cooking oil sold at 3,000 kyat for 1.6kg now sells for over double, 8,000kyat.

    “It’s the same with fish, chicken, fuel, and medicine – family planning implants have almost doubled in cost from 25,000 kyat to now selling at 45,000 kyat.”

    Humanitarian crisis potential
    Kyaw is dismayed that the media outside the country are not covering stories that have a huge impact on people’s daily struggle to feed and care for their families and have the real potential for a massive humanitarian crisis in the near future.

    “The focus is on the revolution, tallies of dead soldiers, politics — all important, but journalists and local and international media need to report on the hidden costs of the military’s coup. Local media outlets need to find solutions to better cover these issues.”

    Kyaw stresses international governments and institutions — ASEAN, UK, US, China, and India — need to stop talking and take real steps to remove and curb the military’s destruction of the country.

    “In two years, they displaced over a million people, destroyed thousands of houses and religious buildings, attacked schools and hospitals — killing students and civilians — what is the UNSC waiting for?”

    An independent think tank, the Institute for Strategy and Policy – Myanmar, and the UN agency for refugees confirm Kyaws Kyaw’s claims.The Institute for Strategy and Policy reports “at least 28,419 homes and buildings were torched or destroyed…in the aftermath of the coup between 1 February 2021, and 15 July 2022.”

    The UN agency responsible for refugees, the UNHCR, estimates the number of displaced people in Myanmar is a staggering 1,574,400. Since the military coup and up to January 23, the number was 1,244,000 people displaced.

    While the world’s media and governments focus their attention and military aid on Ukraine, Myanmar’s people continue to ask why their plight continues to be ignored.

    Phil Thornton is a journalist and senior adviser to the International Federation of Journalists in Southeast Asia. This article was first published by the IFJ Asia-Pacific blog and is republished with the author’s permission. Thornton is also a contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

    *Name has been changed as requested for security concerns.

  • ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

    In 2016, Congress passed a law that was supposed to make the military justice system more transparent, instructing the U.S. military’s six branches to give the public broader access to court records. Seven years later, the Department of Defense has finally issued guidelines for how the services should comply with the law, but they fall far short of the transparency lawmakers intended.

    Caroline Krass, general counsel for the Defense Department, told officials from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard and Space Force in a memorandum last month that they could mostly continue doing what they have been for years: keep many court records secret from the public.

    In their 2016 law, lawmakers had envisioned a military justice system that operated much like federal courts, where the public has real-time electronic access to dockets, records and filings. Concerned about fairness and secrecy in the military system, Congress wanted the public to have similar access to records for courts-martial to allow for more scrutiny of how the military handles criminal cases, particularly sexual assault.

    The law calls for the “timely” release of court records “at all stages of the military justice system … including pretrial, trial, post-trial, and appellate processes.”

    The newly released Pentagon guidance, however, does little to make the system more open. The guidance tells the services they do not have to make any records public until after a trial ends. It gives the military the discretion to suppress key trial information. And in cases where the defendant is found not guilty, the directive appears to be even more sweeping: The military services will be allowed to keep the entire record secret permanently.

    The Pentagon did not respond to ProPublica’s questions about the new guidance. A Navy prosecutor argued in a court filing last year that the military cannot act like its counterparts in federal court because the military system doesn’t have a clerk of court and needs to be “fluid and mobile.”

    Despite the 2016 law, which required consistent standards across the military, the Pentagon for years let the individual services decide how to comply with the law, and public access to court-martial records remained extremely limited.

    Frank Rosenblatt, vice president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said even before the new guidance was issued, the spirit of the law wasn’t met. Leaving access decisions “to the discretion of military officials really is a default towards secrecy,” he said.

    In September, ProPublica sued the Navy for refusing to provide nearly all of the court records in a high-profile arson case. The Navy prosecuted a sailor for allegedly setting the USS Bonhomme Richard on fire. In 2020, the amphibious assault ship burned for more than four days and was destroyed, a more than $1 billion loss. A ProPublica investigation showed there was little evidence of the sailor’s guilt, and Seaman Recruit Ryan Mays was found not guilty at his court-martial.

    ProPublica’s lawsuit was successful in getting the Navy to release hundreds of pages of court-martial documents in the Mays case. The suit also challenges the Navy’s overall policy for withholding records and is ongoing. The lawsuit could end up questioning Krass’ new directive as well for not following the 2016 law or abiding by the First Amendment and judicial rulings that grant timely access to court records.

    ProPublica’s lawsuit appears to have spurred the new Pentagon guidance. ProPublica, along with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and other media organizations, also wrote a letter to Krass requesting she outline standards for the military to follow. The National Institute of Military Justice supported ProPublica’s lawsuit and wrote a separate letter to Krass.

    However, nothing in the new policy would force the Navy or the other services to release similar court records in the future.

    The guidance allows the military to withhold records when public access and scrutiny is often most important: leading up to and during a court-martial. Under the new policy, the military doesn’t have to make records public until after a verdict is reached and the trial record is certified. The guidance says the services can take up to 45 days after certification to release any documents.

    That arbitrary time frame is out of step with how every other court is run, Rosenblatt said. After a trial is over, “the newsworthiness is gone,” he said.

    Even then, only a limited part of the trial record has to be produced. The services do not have to provide transcripts or recordings of court sessions or any evidence entered as exhibits, according to the Pentagon guidance. And the Pentagon does not consider any preliminary hearing documents to be part of the trial record.

    In the military, there is a proceeding called an Article 32 hearing to decide whether there is enough evidence for a trial. Under the new guidance, the military won’t have to put these hearings on the docket, so the public won’t even know they are happening.

    Records from Article 32 and other preliminary hearings tell the public a lot about whether the system is just. That’s where citizens can review and assess what cases the military are deciding to prosecute, Rosenblatt said.

    In Mays’ case, for example, the judge who presided over the Article 32 hearing recommended that the Navy drop its case against him for lack of evidence. The Navy ignored that recommendation and moved forward with the prosecution. The service then refused to make that recommendation public.

    The new Pentagon guidance also allows the military to permanently seal the trial record if the defendant is found not guilty. This could also prevent an assessment of fairness. For example, if a general is accused of sexual assault and found not guilty, the military doesn’t have to release any court records about the case, and the public would not be able to scrutinize how the case of a high-ranking officer was handled.

    The new guidelines make one change in favor of transparency. The military will no longer use Freedom of Information Act exemptions to justify redacting information from court records. FOIA law is not used to withhold or redact court records in any other court in the country, and it was inappropriately applied in military courts, Rosenblatt said.

    For example, in the Mays case, the Navy cited FOIA to redact the names of witnesses who testified in open court at trial.

    Krass’ new guidance says that the 2016 law makes access to courts-martial records “distinct from the right” to federal records granted under FOIA. Instead the federal Privacy Act, which regulates how the government can collect and release information about private individuals, should guide “which information and documents from the military justice system are to be made accessible to the public.”

    Although Rosenblatt said eliminating FOIA from the military judicial process was progress, the Privacy Act also doesn’t belong in the equation. The guidance also leaves how to interpret the Privacy Act and release of documents up to the services.

    “The Privacy Act,” Rosenblatt said, “is increasingly being weaponized to shield what’s going on in the military justice system from the public.”

    This post was originally published on Articles and Investigations – ProPublica.

  • RNZ Pacific

    A New Zealand-based professor in comparative politics says the Fiji constitution needs to clear up the role of the military.

    Dr Jon Fraenkel of Victoria University, formerly of the University of the South Pacific, says the 2013 constitution revived the provision that existed in the 1990 constitution which gave the military responsibility for looking after the well-being of the Fiji people.

    But he told Pacific Waves this needed clarifying.

    “Of course, when that was first introduced in 1990, it was as part of an ethno-nationalist constitution that was seeking to codify indigenous paramountcy in the states. At that point, I think the Fiji military [Republic of Fiji Military Forces] contemplated briefly assuming power in an unconstitutional way for 16 years.

    “But it didn’t do that. And by the early 1990s, things had calmed down there was a desire to read for civilian government, for the military to keep out of politics. It’s only really in the wake of the [George] Speight coup that Mohammed Aziz rehabilitated this provision in the 1990 constitution, and suggested that it was still applied under the ’97 constitution, and then they put it in the 2013 constitution.

    “And what does this mean? Well, it could mean just about anything. What does it mean to look after the welfare of the Fiji people? You could interpret that to mean anything at all?

    “I noticed that before the final result, when [Sitiveni] Rabuka, perhaps misguidedly, complained to the military commander about the glitch about the counting of the election ballots, the military commander said that that wasn’t within his remit.

    Protecting ‘well-being’
    “In other words, he thought that it didn’t fall under section 131 of the Constitution that gives the military right to intervene to protect the well-being of the Fiji people.

    “But after the formation of the new government in early January, the military commander, Major-General Jone Kalouniwai did make a peculiar statement where he expressed concern about the ambition of the government and about the speed at which things were moving.

    “And he also suggested that the military might have some responsibility for making sure that the separation of powers is guaranteed.

    “Now, that’s usually a role for the courts, not for the military. So one has to be careful about this kind of expansive understanding of the role of the military and the new Fiji. I think there needs to be further discussions about what that actually means.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    Fiji's Biman Prasad (from left), Bill Gavoka and Sitiveni Rabuka
    Party leaders of Fiji’s new coalition government . . . Deputy Prime Minister Biman Prasad, National Federation Party (NFP) (from left); Deputy PM Viliame Gavoka (Sodelpa); and Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, People’s Alliance(PA). Image: RNZ Pacific

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The world is a frightening place at the moment. War in Ukraine, US hostility towards China, environmental and economic crises. But don’t worry too much. One Tory MP has written a four point plan to save the world. And at the centre of it sits Britain – and his own undeniable strategic genius.

    Bournemouth East MP, ex-soldier, and hawk Tobias Ellwood sketched his plans for world domination in Conservative Home. His master plan involves beating Russia and containing China. And he says Britain is the ideal vehicle for this mission.

    As an example of his smarts, Ellwood was an avid supporter of the plan to send more tanks to Ukraine, despite warnings it could escalate the war there:

    Man on a mission

    Ellwood warns us of “a new Cold War”, and attempts to present an answer:

    …one grand strategy – the New Containment – comprising three interrelated operational actions: for Russia, for China, and for the West.

    His proposals include, amongst other things:

    • building an arms factory in Poland
    • declaring as a victory aim the complete expulsion of Russian forces from all-Ukrainian territory
    • declaring the port of Odesa as a ‘UN Safe Haven’ so Ukrainian grain can be exported.

    He also tells us we must support Taiwan as a bulwark against China. He urges the government to convince the British people that China is a danger to us all. Nothing is said of the inevitable rise of anti-Chinese racism which would result. Ellwood also recommends finding allies in the Chinese diaspora and developing a parallel NATO-type organisation for Asia.

    What this amounts to is moving imaginary chess pieces around a board. This is itself very much in keeping with the brand of analysis favoured by Westminster hawks. And it also somewhat denies the complexity of the situation at hand.

    The West’s mission

    As for the West’s role in his plan, Ellwood opens highly originally – with a reference to Churchill:

    In 1941 Churchill braved the Atlantic to meet with President Roosevelt and dared to speculate what a post-war world might look like.

    He adds:

    The resulting Atlantic Charter paved the way for the international economic and security model that served the globe well for decades.

    The assumption appears to be that the post-war economic and security model (capitalism and imperialism) was in some sense effective or equitable enough to deserve a reprise. Though looking at the state of the world today – including Ukraine – one might feel the need to reflect a little deeper.

    Could it be possible, for example, that many of the issues we face today flow from the post-war settlement of Western military and capitalist hegemony? This doesn’t seem to figure at all for Ellwood.

    Containment

    Our security architecture, Ellwood says, must not decline any further. By which he appears to mean the West’s capacity to make imperial war. Britain, however, is positioned to lead a renewed policy of containing our enemies:

    Britain is well-placed to help lead this balancing act with our reputation as a nation that defends and promotes hard-fought standards and values. But we have become risk-averse and distracted.

    Climate change, the most pressing global security threat of all, is relegated to a mention in the closing sections of Ellwood’s piece. And there is a weird sense from Ellwood that it is a battle that we are currently winning:

    We have led in the most serious global battle of our times – climate change – but now we must widen our horizons further.

    Tory fantasia

    Ellwood’s article belongs to a distinct genre. There is a generation of hawkish scholars, MPs, and former military officers who spend their time trying to re-draw the map of the world in their heads – and then write terrible articles about it.

    The themes are usually similar: nostalgia, power, decline, and more than a hint of bloodthirstiness. The assumptions are always nationalist, capitalist, and imperialist. These offerings usually try to reduce to the complexity of international affairs to worryingly simple to-do lists.

    And that would be fine, if some of these people were not near the levers of power. That’s why this kind of dross must be challenged wherever we find it.

    Featured image via Wikimedia Commons/Cpl Lee Goddard, cropped to 770 x 403, licensed under the Open Government Licence.

    By Joe Glenton

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The United States has dropped an average of 46 bombs per day around the globe in the last 20 years. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. Transcript: *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos. Mike Papantonio: The United States has dropped an average of 46 bombs every day for the last […]

    The post United States Bombed Foreign Countries EVERY DAY For The Past 20 years appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • COMMENTARY: By Ian Powell

    On 14 December 2022 German police arrested 25 people over what was called the “Reichsburger plot”. Two days later The Observer published an article by Philip Oltermann posing the question of whether this was a far-right “…sinister plan to overthrow the German state or just a rag-tag revolution?”

    Although a long way away from our shores, this bizarre event has implications for New Zealand which should not be ignored. It got me to thinking about the attempted coups by electorally defeated presidents in the United States and Brazil.

    This then led on to considering the occupation of Parliament grounds in early 2022 and a recent sighting in a tiny community about seven km away from my home on the Kāpiti Coast.

    In the midst of writing this all up, came the unexpected resignation of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern last week. Then union leader Robert Reid popped up with a pertinent observation. But first, Germany.

    German coup-plotters
    Along with 25 other German co-conspirators, one Maximilian Eder was arrested. They were accused of planning to overthrow the state by violent means and install a shadow government headed by a minor German aristocrat.

    Few of these coup plotters were well-known public figures. But they included some with a military background, doctors, judges, gourmet chefs and opera singers, a Lower Saxony civil servant at the criminal police office, and “…several of the ragtag bunch of wannabe revolutionaries seemed to have been radicalised in the comfortably well-off, respectable centre of society.”

    Maximilian Eder
    Maximilian Eder, a leading German far-right coup plotter. . . . genuine commander of one of Germany’s armoured infantry battalions between 1998 and 2000. Image: Political Bytes

    Eder was a genuine commander of one of Germany’s armoured infantry battalions between 1998 and 2000. He had served in Kosovo and Afghanistan and was a founding member of Germany’s special forces command.

    What further rattled Germany’s cage was the inclusion of a former member of the federal parliament from the far-right AfD party. She had knowledge of security arrangements and special access privileges to the complex of parliamentary buildings in the heart of Berlin.

    Eccentrics or serious threat?
    The plotters’ potential targets included seven members of Germany’s Parliament, including the Foreign Minister, conservative opposition, and two leaders of the governing Social Democrat party.

    German police found weapons in 50 of the 150 properties linked to the co-conspirators (there may have been other weapons stashed away elsewhere). This was an insufficient arsenal to overthrow the government of a country with a population of 83 million. However, it was enough to carry out a targeted terror attack killing and maiming many.

    The question remains unanswered as to whether these conspirators really did seriously threaten German democracy as it presently exists or were they “…just a  bunch of eccentrics with a hyperactive imagination…”

    The Reichstag
    Coup conspirators plotted to take over Germany’s Parliament, the Reichstag. Image: Political Bytes

    One of  the difficulties in making this call is that previously the growth of the German far-right had been under-estimated. The relatively recent electoral success of the AfD party was unexpected. Oltermann concluded his interesting article by citing a German terrorism expert who noted that while he didn’t believe the coup-plotters would have overthrown the government, the question that remained was how much damage they would have caused in trying to.

    Washington DC and Brasilia
    While we await a fuller analysis of the extent to which these coup-plotters were a threat to German democracy, we know enough to make some conclusions, especially in an international context.

    The German coup-plotters may have included eccentrics. But their defining characteristic was that they were from that part of the extreme far-right of politics which was prepared to use violence to achieve their objectives.

    There are similarities with two actual attempted coups seeking to overturn election results and putting back into power two far-right presidents who were defeated at the polls. These occurred in the respective capitals of the United States (Washington) in January 2001 and Brazil (Brasilia) two years later.

    These attempts to put Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro back in power were both far-right led and involved short violent destructive occupations of their parliaments. The major difference was significant high-level military involvement in the attempted Brazilian coup.

    Far-right levering off anti-vaccination protests
    In February-March 2022 there was an anti-vaccination occupation of New Zealand’s Parliament Grounds. Last February I published a Political Bytes blog on the far-right agenda  in this occupation.

    My essential point was that the susceptibility, to say the least, of many of these protesters was fertile territory for far-right leaders to exploit, influence and shape its more violent direction. This was well-highlighted in the excellent Fire & Fury podcast documentary published by Stuff.


    Fire & Fury: Who’s driving a violent, misinformed New Zealand – and why?      Video: Stuff

    The documentary has come under some peculiar criticism from those who believe it should have given similar or greater blame for the actions of Parliament’s Speaker in trying to dissuade the occupiers from continuing the protest.

    However, aside from overstating his impact, this criticism misses the whole point of the documentary. Its focus was on what was behind the occupation and related protests, including the significant far-right influence and support.

    One of the biggest beneficiaries of these protests was the far-right Counterspin Media online outlet. It reported the occupation virtually non-stop, quickly becoming the main source of news for the occupiers and their supporters.

    Run by local far-right leaders, Counterspin Media relies on a far-right media outlet in the United States for support (Trump confidant Steve Bannon is in its central leadership). From a very small base its viewing numbers have rocketed upwards.

    The occupation also accelerated the use of two new terms to designate some people within the far-right – “sovereign citizens” and “sheriffs”. The former believe they are not bound by laws unless they personally consent to them. They carry out violence although this is largely verbal.

    The latter, sheriffs, believe they can take the law into their own hands, including apprehending, violence and even execution. In other words, those holding either designation are vigilantes.

    Now to Peka Peka
    This leads on to the peacefully seaside locality Peka Peka on the Kāpiti Coast of the lower North Island with a population of around 700. As it happens, it is seven km from where I live. I frequently cycle through it and walk dogs on its beautiful beach.

    Its name is derived from a native New Zealand bat, the Pekapeka, which represents the interwoven nature of the spirit world and the world of the living — the seen and the unseen.

    But following the end of the occupation of Parliament Grounds a small group of occupiers moved on to the land of a supportive local farmer. While numbers have diminished there are still there.

    While driving past earlier this month I noticed a conspicuous vehicle parked outside on the road as photographs I took show. The vehicle belongs to Counterspin Media.

    The issue at hand was the far-right’s support for the parents of a critically ill baby who tried to deny him access to a life-saving blood transfusion because overwhelmingly donors are vaccinated. They and Counterspin Media have also denied the right of their baby to privacy by breaching a court order for name suppression. [The matter was resolved by the court overruling the parents which enabled a successful transfusion that saved the baby’s life.]

    The "sheriff" is in Peka Peka
    The “sheriff” is in Peka Peka. Image: Political Bytes

    What was particularly relevant to this blog, however, was the fact that the far-right Counterspin Media was present visiting the small group who among them are believed to include sovereign citizens and a sheriff or two.

    It is a very long bow to suggest that the occupation of Parliament Grounds was responsible for Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s dramatic resignation last week. Nevertheless its ferocity (including intimidation and threats of execution) and duration rattled her government’s cage and confidence.

    Outgoing NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern
    Outgoing NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern . . . many commentators are attributing her resignation to the volume and viciousness of the personal attacks on her, much of which was misogynous. Image: Getty Images/The Conversation

    Many are attributing Arden’s resignation to the volume and viciousness of the personal attacks on her, much of which was misogynous. They are right to make this conclusion but it is much deeper than this. To begin with, had her government been more successful in policy development and implementation or been doing better in the polls, she was less likely to have resigned.

    Former Prime Minister Helen Clark (1999-2008) also came under vicious misogynous attacks but, as she has acknowledged, the attacks on Ardern far exceed those on her. What is the difference? First, social media’s influence in Clark’s time was much less than Ardern’s.

    Second, the far-right was politically much less influential than now. We now have far-right governments in countries such as Italy, Poland, Hungary and India. There are strong far-right movements threatening countries like France and Spain. Both the United States and Brazil have had single term far-right presidents.

    Germany had a follow-up from the December coup-plotters this week with five more far-right activists arrested for a second alleged coup plot, including kidnapping the health minister, to overthrow the government which The Guardian reported on January 23.

    In New Zealand, the far-right’s levering off the anti-vaccination protests has led to an environment of threats through a sense of deluded entitlement, as Stuff reported on January 20, of a magnitude far greater than Clark and her government ever experienced.

    Union leader Robert Reid was as close to getting it right as one can get in a Facebook post on January 20. He observed that, on the one hand, unlike the United States and Brazil, New Zealand was able to keep right-wing and fascist mobs from storming their parliaments.

    However, on the other hand, in New Zealand they “…scored their first victory of bringing down the political leader of the country. Not a good feeling.”

    I agree with Reid but would make the qualification that these far-right influenced and led “mobs” significantly contributed to bringing down a political leader.

    Sociopaths and psychopaths
    Soon after commencing working for the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists over three decades ago, I asked a leading psychiatrist, Dr Allen Fraser, what was the difference between sociopaths and psychopaths (Dr Fraser was the union’s first elected vice-president and second president).

    His response, which I have never forgotten, was to repeat what he advised medical students and doctors-in-training: Sociopaths believe in castles in the sky; psychopaths live in castles in the sky

    In other words, while Helen Clark was threatened by sociopaths, Jacinda Ardern was threatened by psychopaths. The transition from the former to the latter was the increasing influence of the far-right.

    Robert Reid is right; it is not a good feeling. He is a master of the understatement.

    Ian Powell is a progressive health, labour market and political “no-frills” forensic commentator in New Zealand. A former senior doctors union leader for more than 30 years, he blogs at Second Opinion and Political Bytes, where this article was first published. Republished with the author’s permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • America’s Lawyer E36: Drug companies tried to pressure Twitter into blocking calls for vaccine patents to be waived during the pandemic – we’ll bring you the details. President Biden now has his own document scandal to worry about, and it may end up costing him in next year’s election. And a new study has confirmed […]

    The post Biden’s 2024 Run Dismantled By Document Debacle appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

  • New documents show that the government LIED about a drone strike that killed an Afghan civilian and a group of children in August of 2021. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. Transcript: *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

    The post Documents Reveal Pentagon LIED About Killing Children In Drone Strike appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • By Gorethy Kenneth in Port Moresby

    An angry tirade on Papua New Guinea and Indonesia border issues in the PNG Parliament yesterday is likely to ignite an international uproar over the alleged behaviour of government officials.

    During yesterday’s session, Vanimo-Green MP and former soldier Belden Namah, asked why border liaison meetings were always held in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta.

    He also called on the government to allow for this Indonesia-PNG Border Treaty — which PNG has not ratified — to be withheld so serious issues pertaining to the border arrangements between the two countries would be addressed.

    Namah, who is the parliamentary chair for Defence, Foreign Affairs and International Trade, claimed that Indonesian government officials were “getting our officers drunk, giving them women and then come the meeting — they are just sitting there saying, ‘Yes sir, yes sir’!”

    “Every time a border liaison meeting is held we are taking our people to Jakarta.

    “When they go to Jakarta, they go and drink Bintang beer and get into illegal activities and they don’t attend border liaison meetings representing our country,” Namah claimed.

    He said PNG soldiers were no longer patrolling the PNG border and that Indonesians were constantly breaching the border and crossing into PNG.

    ‘Serious security issue’
    “This is a serious national issue, serious security issue that we need to address. We need to carefully look at these issues.”

    Namah’s angry outburst followed a move by the Foreign Affairs Minister Justin Tkatchenko to introduce the ratification of the Border Treaty agreement between PNG and Indonesia.

    “We must make hard decisions, we are a sovereign nation. We cannot go on border liaison all the time in Jakarta,” Namah said.

    “There are a lot of issues yet to be addressed and we must not rush the ratification of these border arrangements.

    PNG's Defence parliamentary chair Belden Namah
    PNG’s Defence parliamentary committee chair Belden Namah . . . “Indonesians have already crossed into our side — we have turned a blind eye.” Image: PNG Post-Courier

    “We as a country have not been seriously looking at the border demarcation, whether it is the responsibility of the Foreign Affairs or Provincial Affairs.

    “When you go to the border, Indonesians have already crossed into our side and they are already engaged in activities on our side of the border — we have turned a blind eye.

    ‘Do we know what’s happening?’
    “Do we know what is happening on the border?”

    More than 12,000 citizens from West Sepik — especially people from Namah’s electorate — had crossed over to Indonesia because “on our side, we, as a national government” were not providing basic services to Papua New Guineans.

    “I want to have a look at this treaty before Parliament can pass it and I am arguing now as the chairman for Defence, Foreign Affairs and International Trade, I want to have a look at it before it is signed,” Namah said.

    “I want to raise the issues of our land, why has Indonesia crossed into the side of our border?”

    Namah said that perhaps PNG needed needed to close the Batas [trade] centre in Wutung and the Indonesians moved back to their side.

    “Maybe we should build a naval base at the mouth of River Torassi in Western Province and ask the Indonesians to dismantle their naval base on their side,” he said.

    “I am proposing now that every border liaison be held outside of Indonesia and PNG, somewhere neutral so we can raise these issues.

    Important sovereignty issues
    “These are important sovereignty issues.

    “I propose that this particular treaty be withheld to allow my committee, the parliamentary committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs and Trade to review it before we actually sign it.”

    According to Prime Minister James Marape, the border treaty agreement was signed in 2013 and ratified by NEC in 2015.

    Since then, there had been no border talks.

    Gorethy Kenneth is a PNG Post-Courier senior journalist. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ Pacific

    Fiji’s Home affairs Minister has held an urgent meeting with the nation’s military chief after he expressed concern about the new People’s Alliance-led government.

    The government, a three-party coalition led by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, has been in power for less than a month.

    Major-General Jone Kalouniwai yesterday warned that the government was taking “shortcuts that circumvent the relevant processes and procedures” which could lead to “long-term national security consequences”.

    Kalouniwai’s statement also highlighted the military’s “guardian role” in the constitution, which he claimed was to ensure “excesses [of power] of the past are not repeated”.

    The Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua, who has responsibility for defence, said he and Kalouniwai had a frank exchange of views, but both were committed to respecting the result of last month’s election.

    In a statement, Tikoduadua said he assured the commander that all the government’s actions had been guided by the law.

    “The commander and I have spoken, and we have expressed our views frankly to each other. We both believe in the rule of law, democracy, and the rights of every citizen to go about their affairs in peace,” he said.

    ‘Respecting will of people’
    “We are both committed to respecting the will of the people through the outcome of the 2022 general election and protecting that decision, let come what may.

    “No one should forget that the commander and the military have also helped us navigate our way, democratically, to a new government a month ago when many people were uncertain that Fiji could achieve a successful transition of government.

    “All of us are learning. We are slowly undoing all the misconceptions about democratic governance that have been allowed to take root over the last 16 years. Our institutions are absorbing the impact of a new govemment with different ideas and new priorities.

    “But through all of this, we will be talking to each other, in the spirit of consultation to provide the best for the Fijian people.”

    The FBC News reports Prime Minister Rabuka said he was not concerned about the public utterances made by Jone Kalouniwai.

    He said he had no concerns over the relationship he shared with the military, and he was confident in the RFMF leadership and also the force members.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    Former Fiji Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama and army commander Jone Kalouniwai (right).
    Former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama with army commander Major-General Jone Kalouniwai. Image: Fiji govt File/RNZ Pacific

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Pacific Media Watch

    Fiji’s military commander stirred a wave of anxiety today with an extraordinary statement claiming concern over the “ambition and speed” of political changes since last month’s election that could have “fateful” security consequences.

    Major-General Ro Jone Kalouniwai, commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF), said in the statement that the military played a “guardian role” under the Constitution and “new assaults” on Fiji’s democracy would “not be tolerated”.

    But he was summoned by Home Affairs Minister Pio Tikoduadua for a meeting this afternoon and Major-General Kalouniwai denied to news media that the military planned any takeover.

    Fiji has had four coups in less than four decades, carried out by either the military or rogue soldiers.

    Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka staged the first two coups in 1987, but he was the elected prime minister 1992-99, while businessman George Speight supported by rogue troops carried out the third in 2000, and then military commander Voreqe Bainimarama seized power in 2006 with a “coup to end all coups”.

    Bainimarama has held power for the past 16 years, half of them as the elected leader, but narrowly lost his FijiFirst party majority in last month’s election.

    All four coups have been marked by allegations of ethnic tension between indigenous iTaukei Fijians and Indo-Fijians.

    RFMF ‘backs democracy’
    However, in an exclusive interview this afternoon with Fijivillage News, Major-General Kalouniwai stressed that the RFMF would continue to stand for democracy, the rule of law and honour, and the government.

    Fiji Home Affairs Minister Pio Tikoduadua
    Fiji Home Affairs Minister Pio Tikoduadua . . . reassured the military commander that the coalition government was following the law and the Constitution. Image: FijiOne News

    Home Affairs Minister Tikoduadua said after their meeting he had assured the commander that all the actions of the new People’s Alliance-led coalition government had been guided by the law.

    The minister also claimed that the commander’s statement had been “sensationalised” by media and he was concerned that state-run FBC News was “inciting and misrepresenting” what Major-General Kalouniwai had said.

    Tikoduadua said the news had been “corrected” by the commander.

    Major-General Kalouniwai’s statement and reaction have been widely carried by news media in Fiji.

    According to The Fiji Times, Major-General Kalouniwai had raised concern in his statement over some of the rapid changes the government had undertaken in “just 16 days in office”.

    He said that section 131 of the Constitution stipulated “the RFMF plays a guardian role where the excesses of the past are not repeated and any new assaults on Fiji’s emerging democracy are not tolerated”.

    ‘Creating shortcuts’
    Major-General Kalouniwai said: “The RFMF has quietly observed with growing concern over the last few days, the ambition and speed of the government in implementing these sweeping changes are creating shortcuts that circumvent the relevant processes and procedures that protect the integrity of the law and the Constitution.

    “Whilst the RFMF recognises the justifications by the current government to establish these changes, the RFMF believes that trying and failing to democratise in adverse circumstances has the potential to bring about fateful, long-term national security consequences.

    “The RFMF is concerned whether these rapid changes are being pursued without a full understanding of the process and procedures or intentionally done to challenge the integrity of the law and the Constitution of this land.”

    Major-General Kalouniwai said the RFMF firmly believed the separation of powers between the executive and the judicial arms of the state must be respected, reports The Fiji Times.

    “It must be important to understand and appreciate that a strong rule of law is built on respect for and adherence to a clear separation of powers between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.

    “Whatever the reasons may be, the RFMF feels that such actions and decisions is putting at risk the very nature of the law and the separation of powers that clearly demarcate the independence of the three arms of government.”

    Major-General Kalouniwai said section 131 of the Constitution also ensured the values and principles of democracy, including the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution, were not undermined.

    ‘No takeover plan’
    FBC News reports that Major-General Kalouniwai said he did “not plan to take over the government”.

    The commander said he would not make any further comments about his earlier statement and Minister Tikoduadua would brief Fijians about their meeting this afternoon.

    Major-General Kalouniwai told Fijivillage News that RFMF had spoken in defence of democracy and the rule of law before, during and after the 2022 general elections.

    The commander said that today’s statement focused on ensuring that the government followed proper procedures and processes when making changes.

    He said the “rule of law must be paramount”.

    Home Affairs Minister Pio Tikoduadua, who is also Minister of Defence, said he had assured Major-General Kalouniwai that all the government’s actions had been guided by the law, reports Fijivillage News.

    He added that he had had a “cordial meeting” with the commander, who had assured him that he would no longer be making any public statement such as the one earlier today.

    Tikoduadua said he had discussed two main issues with the commander — concerns over the government plan for sacked Fiji Airways and Air Terminal Services staff to be rehired, and over the future of Fiji diplomats abroad.

    In May 2020, 758 Fiji Airways and 258 ATS staff lost their jobs due to covid-19.

    Tikoduadua said the major-general had pledged support for the government.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By: Karen Jowers

    A new allowance, designed to be a safety net for lower-income active duty military families, is set to take effect Jan. 1. It will help these families make ends meet, and addresses hunger and food insecurity.

    Based on DoD rules implementing the congressionally -mandated Basic Needs Allowance, Pentagon officials estimates that about 300 active duty families may be eligible. Air Force officials’ initial screening of airmen and guardians found that 36 of their service members are potentially eligible. Officials anticipate that those eligible will be junior enlisted members with larger families.

    Active duty members with families are eligible if their gross household income is less than 130% of the federal poverty guidelines for their location and the number of people in the household. The allowance will fill the gap between their income and the poverty guidelines, which are set the by Department of Health and Human Services.

    Officials in the service branches are in various stages of developing their procedures, and are screening service members for eligibility. They’ll notify these service members about how to apply. Total income includes spouse income and other sources.

    A new allowance, designed to be a safety net for lower-income active duty military families, is set to take effect Jan. 1. It will help these families make ends meet, and addresses hunger and food insecurity.

    Based on DoD rules implementing the congressionally -mandated Basic Needs Allowance, Pentagon officials estimates that about 300 active duty families may be eligible. Air Force officials’ initial screening of airmen and guardians found that 36 of their service members are potentially eligible. Officials anticipate that those eligible will be junior enlisted members with larger families.

    Active duty members with families are eligible if their gross household income is less than 130% of the federal poverty guidelines for their location and the number of people in the household. The allowance will fill the gap between their income and the poverty guidelines, which are set the by Department of Health and Human Services.

    Officials in the service branches are in various stages of developing their procedures, and are screening service members for eligibility. They’ll notify these service members about how to apply. Total income includes spouse income and other sources.

    In negotiations for the 2023 defense policy bill, House and Senate lawmakers agreed to make more families eligible for the new Basic Needs Allowance by raising the income cap to 150% of federal poverty guidelines, up from the 130% set by the 2022 law establishing the allowance. DoD officials estimate that 2,400 families might be eligible under those 150% limits, depending on other household income. DoD would be required to change its calculations for the eligibility no later than Jan. 1, 2024, but it could be done earlier.

    The bill also gives DoD leeway to expand income eligibility to 200% of the federal poverty guidelines in certain circumstances.

    The housing allowance is counted as income, except for service members living in areas designated by DoD as being high cost areas. Advocates contend the housing allowance shouldn’t be counted as income, because it bumps too many families from qualifying for the new stipend.

    This post was originally published on Basic Income Today.

  • ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

    In 2019, reporter Lynzy Billing returned to Afghanistan to research the murders of her mother and sister nearly 30 years earlier. Instead, in the country’s remote reaches, she stumbled upon the CIA-backed Zero Units, who conducted night raids — quick, brutal operations designed to have resounding psychological impacts while ostensibly removing high-priority enemy targets.

    So, Billing attempted to catalog the scale of civilian deaths left behind by just one of four Zero Units, known as the 02, over a four year period. The resulting report represents an effort no one else has done or will ever be able to do again. Here is what she found:

    • At least 452 civilians were killed in 107 raids. This number is almost certainly an undercount. While some raids did result in the capture or death of known militants, others killed bystanders or appeared to target people for no clear reason.
    • A troubling number of raids appear to have relied on faulty intelligence by the CIA and other U.S. intelligence-gathering services. Two Afghan Zero Unit soldiers described raids they were sent on in which they said their targets were chosen by the United States.
    • The former head of Afghanistan’s intelligence agency acknowledged that the units were getting it wrong at times and killing civilians. He oversaw the Zero Units during a crucial period and agreed that no one paid a consequence for those botched raids. He went on to describe an operation that went wrong: “I went to the family myself and said: ‘We are sorry. … We want to be different from the Taliban.’ And I mean we did, we wanted to be different from the Taliban.”
    • The Afghan soldiers weren’t alone on the raids; U.S. special operations forces soldiers working with the CIA often joined them. The Afghan soldiers Billing spoke to said they were typically accompanied on raids by at least 10 U.S. special operations forces soldiers. “These deaths happened at our hands. I have participated in many raids,” one of the Afghans said, “and there have been hundreds of raids where someone is killed and they are not Taliban or ISIS, and where no militants are present at all.”
    • Military planners baked potential “collateral damage” into the pre-raid calculus — how many women/children/noncombatants were at risk if the raid went awry, according to one U.S. Army Ranger Billing spoke to. Those forecasts were often wildly off, he said, yet no one seemed to really care. He told Billing that night raids were a better option than airstrikes but acknowledged that the raids risked creating new insurgent recruits. “You go on night raids, make more enemies, then you gotta go on more night raids for the more enemies you now have to kill.”
    • Because the Zero Units operated under a CIA program, their actions were part of a “classified” war, with the lines of accountability so obscured that no one had to answer for operations that went wrong. And U.S. responsibility for the raids was quietly muddied by a legal loophole that allows the CIA — and any U.S. soldiers lent to the agency for their operations — to act without the same level of oversight as the American military.
    • Congressional aides and former intelligence committee staffers said they don’t believe Congress was getting a complete picture of the CIA’s overseas operations. Lawyers representing whistleblowers said there is ample motivation to downplay to Congress the number of civilians killed or injured in such operations. By the time reports get to congressional oversight committees, one lawyer said, they’re “undercounting deaths and overstating accuracy.”
    • U.S. military and intelligence agencies have long relied on night raids by forces like the 02 unit to fight insurgencies around the globe. The strategy has, again and again, drawn outrage for its reliance on sometimes flawed intelligence and civilian death count. In 1967, the CIA’s Phoenix Program famously used kill-capture raids against the Viet Cong insurgency in south Vietnam, creating an intense public blowback. Despite the program’s ignominious reputation — a 1971 Pentagon study found only 3% of those killed or captured were full or probationary Viet Cong members above the district level — it appears to have served as a blueprint for future night raid operations.
    • Eyewitnesses, survivors and family members described how Zero Unit soldiers had stormed into their homes at night, killing loved ones** at more than 30 raid sites Billing visited. No Afghan or U.S officials returned to investigate. In one instance, a 22-year-old named Batour witnessed a raid that killed his two brothers. One was a teacher and the other a university student. He told Billing the Zero Unit strategy had actually made enemies of families like his. He and his brothers, he said, had supported the government and vowed never to join the Taliban. Now, he said, he’s not so sure.
    • Little in the way of explanation was ever provided to the relatives of the dead — or to their neighbors and friends — as to why these particular individuals were targeted and what crimes they were accused of. Families who sought answers from provincial officials about the raids were told nothing could be done because they were Zero Unit operations. “They have their own intelligence and they do their own operation,” one grieving family member remembered being told after his three grandchildren were killed in an airstrike and night raid. “The provincial governor gave us a parcel of rice, a can of oil and some sugar” as compensation for the killings. At medical facilities, doctors told Billing they’d never been contacted by Afghan or U.S. investigators or human rights groups about the fate of those injured in the raids. Some of the injured later died, quietly boosting the casualty count.

    In a statement, CIA spokesperson Tammy Thorp said, “As a rule, the U.S. takes extraordinary measures — beyond those mandated by law — to reduce civilian casualties in armed conflict, and treats any claim of human rights abuses with the utmost seriousness.” She said any allegations of human rights abuses by a “foreign partner” are reviewed and, if valid, the CIA and “other elements of the U.S. government take concrete steps, including providing training on applicable law and best practices, or if necessary terminating assistance or the relationship.” Thorp said the Zero Units had been the target of a systematic propaganda campaign designed to discredit them because “of the threat they posed to Taliban rule.”

    The Department of Defense did not respond to questions about Zero Unit operations.

    With a forensic pathologist, Billing drove hundreds of miles across some of the country’s most volatile areas — visiting the sites of more than 30 raids, interviewing witnesses, survivors, family members, doctors and village elders. To understand the program, she met secretly with two Zero Unit soldiers over the course of years, wrangled with Afghanistan’s former spy master in his heavily fortified home and traveled to a diner in the middle of America to meet with an Army Ranger who’d joined the units on operations.

    She also conducted more than 350 interviews with current and former Afghan and American government officials, Afghan commanders, U.S military officials, American defense and security officials and former CIA intelligence officers, as well as U.S. lawmakers and former oversight committee members, counterterrorism and policy officers, civilian-casualty assessment experts, military lawyers, intelligence analysts, representatives of human rights organizations, doctors, hospital directors, coroners, forensic examiners, eyewitnesses and family members — some of whom are not named in the story for their safety.

    While America’s war in Afghanistan may be over, there are lessons to be learned from what it left behind. Billing writes:

    “The American government has scant basis for believing it has a full picture of the Zero Units’ performance. Again and again, I spoke with Afghans who had never shared their stories with anyone. Congressional officials concerned about the CIA’s operations in Afghanistan said they were startled by the civilian death toll I documented.

    As my notebooks filled, I came to realize that I was compiling an eyewitness account of a particularly ignominious chapter in the United States’ fraught record of overseas interventions.

    Without a true reckoning of what happened in Afghanistan, it became clear the U.S. could easily deploy the same failed tactics in some new country against some new threat.”

    Read her full report here.

    This post was originally published on Articles and Investigations – ProPublica.

  • BOOK CHAPTER: By Nicky Hager

    Whistleblower Owen Wilkes was a tireless and formidable researcher for peace and disarmament. Before the internet, he combed publicly available sources on weapons systems and defence strategy.

    In 1968, he revealed the secretive military function of a proposed satellite tracking station in the South Island, and while working in Sweden he was charged with espionage and deported after photographing intriguing but publicly visible installations.

    In a new book about his life, Peacemonger, edited by May Bass and Mark Derby, Nicky Hager writes about Wilkes’ research techniques:


    Owen Wilkes was an outstanding researcher, a role model of how someone can make a difference in the world by good research. But how did he actually do it? Owen managed to study complex subjects such as Cold War communications systems, secret intelligence facilities and foreign military activities in the Pacific.

    There are many important and useful lessons we can learn from how he did this work. The world needs more public interest researchers, on militarism and other subjects. Owen’s self-taught research techniques are like a masterclass in how it is done.

    Lots of information isn’t secret, just hard to find
    Owen worked for many years, sitting at his large desk at the Peace Movement office in Wellington, researching the military communications systems set up to launch and fight nuclear war. How was this possible?

    We are a bit conditioned currently to imagine the only option would be leaked documents from a whistleblower. The first secret of Owen’s success is that he had learned that large amounts of information on these subjects can be found and pieced together from obscure but publicly available sources.

    The heart of his research method was long hours spent poring over US government records and military industry magazines, gathering the precious crumbs of detail like someone panning for gold.

    Behind the large desk were shelves and shelves of open-topped file boxes, each with a cryptic title. These boxes were full of photocopied documents and handwritten notes from his researching. This may all sound very pre-internet; indeed it was largely pre-digital.

    International peace researcher Owen Wilkes
    International peace researcher Owen Wilkes . . . an inspirational resource person for a nuclear-free Pacific and many other disarmament issues. Image: Peacemonger screenshot

    But what Owen was doing would today be called “open source” research and his work is far superior to that carried out by many people with Google and other digital tools at their fingertips. Probably his favourite source of all was a publicly available US defence magazine called Aviation Week and Space Technology. The magazine (now online) is written for military staff and arms manufacturers, keeping them informed about developments in weapons, aircraft and “C3I” systems, which stands for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence systems: one of Owen’s main areas of speciality.

    The magazine also covered Owen’s speciality of “space based” military systems, such as military communication and surveillance satellites. In Owen’s files, which can be viewed at the National Library in Wellington, Aviation Week and Space Technology appears often. In a file box called USA Space Systems is a clipping from 1983 about the US Air Force awarding a contract for a ballistic missile early warning system (nuclear war-fighting equipment). The article revealed that the early warning system would be based at air force bases in Alaska, Greenland and Fylingdales, England — three clues about US foreign military activities.

    By reading and storing away details from numerous such articles, spanning many years, Owen built up a more and more detailed understanding of military and intelligence systems.

    The other endlessly useful source Owen used was US Congress and Senate hearings and reports about the US military budget. This is where each year the US military spells out its military construction plans, new weapons, technology programmes and the rest; often with figures broken down to the level of individual countries and military bases.

    Senior military officials appear at hearings to explain the threats and strategies that justify the spending. As with the military magazines, Owen systematically mined these reports year after year for interesting detail.

    He was especially keen on the US Congress’ Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction Appropriations. His files on US antisatellite weapons, for instance, contain a document from this subcommittee about new Anti-Satellite System Facilities (project number 11610) based at Langley Air Force base, Virginia. It had been approved by the president in the renewed Cold War of the mid-1980s to target Soviet satellites. Details like this were pieces in a 1000-piece jigsaw puzzle.

    When he was based at the Peace Movement Aotearoa office in Wellington, from 1983 until about 1992, Owen spent long hours at the US Embassy library studying the Military Construction Appropriations and other US government documents. Each year the library received copies of the documents as microfiche (microphotos of each page on a film). Owen was a familiar visitor, hunched over the microfiche reader making notes and printing out interesting pages.

    Many times this gave the first clue of construction somewhere in the world, pointing to that country hosting some new US military, nuclear or intelligence activity. The annual US military appropriation information is available to a researcher today. In fact it is now more easily accessed since it is online. But, if anything, Owen’s pre-digital techniques make it clearer how this research is done well. It’s a good reminder that the best sources of information are most often not in the first 10 or 20 hits of a Google search, the point where many people stop looking.

    Experience and persistence
    An important ingredient in all these methods is persistence. The methods usually work best if, like Owen, a researcher sticks at them over time. Sticking at a subject means you start to recognise names and places in an otherwise boring document, appreciate the significance of some fragment of information and understand the big picture into which each piece of information fits.

    Someone who reads deeply and studies a subject over a number of years can in effect become, like Owen, an expert. They may, like him, have no formal university qualifications. But they can know more about their subject than nearly anyone else, which is a good definition of an expert. They recognise the names and places and appreciate the significance of new evidence.

    A textbook example of this was when Owen returned to New Zealand in the early 1980s and went to see a recently discovered secret military site near the beach settlement of Tangimoana in the Manawatu.

    Owen, who had spent years studying secret bases around the world, was the New Zealander most likely to know what he was looking at. There, on one side of the base, was a large circle of antenna poles: a CDAA circularly-disposed antenna array. It instantly told him the Tangimoana facility was a signals intelligence base. It had the same equipment and was part of the same networks as the bases he had studied in Norway and Sweden.

    Ensuring his research was noticed
    The purpose of Owen’s work was to make a difference to the issues he researched. A final and vital part of the work was getting attention for the findings of his research. Owen often spoke in the news and he wrote about the issues he was studying. Research, writing and speaking up are essential ingredients in political change. The part of this he probably enjoyed most was travelling and speaking in public to interested groups.

    During the 1980s, he had major speaking tours to countries including Japan, the Philippines, Australia and Canada (and often around New Zealand). During these trips he would present information about military and intelligence activities in those countries. A 1985 trip to Canada, which he shared with prominent Palau leader Roman Bedor, was typical. He was in Canada for seven weeks, speaking in most parts of the country and numerous times on radio and television.

    One of the things he emphasised was that Canadians, as residents of a Pacific country, should be thinking about what was going on in the Pacific. One of Owen’s recurrent themes was the importance of being aware of the Pacific.

    The final ingredient of a good researcher is caring about the subjects they are working on. This can be heard clearly in everything Owen wrote about the Pacific. He described the Pacific being used for submarine-based nuclear weapons and facilities used to prepare for nuclear war. He talked about the big powers using the Pacific as the “backside of the globe”, epitomised by tiny Johnston Atoll west of Hawai’i where the US military does “anything too unpopular, too dangerous and too secret to do elsewhere”.

    He talked about things that were getting better: French nuclear testing on the way out; chemical weapons being destroyed. But also the region being used as a site for great power rivalry; and, under multiple pressures, the small Pacific countries being at risk of becoming “more repressive, less democratic”. He cared, and that was at the heart of being a public-interest researcher for decades.

    Many of the problems he described are still occurring today. More research, more good research, on these issues and many others is crying out to be done.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • John Bolton recently admitted that he had helped orchestrate coups in other countries on behalf of the US government. Plus, The United States is falling dangerously behind in medical research as other countries make tremendous progress. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more. Transcript: *This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any […]

    The post National Security Advisor Admits To US Foreign Coups & United States FAILS In Medical Innovation appeared first on The Ring of Fire Network.

    This post was originally published on The Ring of Fire.

  • By Arieta Vakasukawaqa in Suva

    Tight police security will greet the Sodelpa management board meeting in Suva tomorrow when it will again decide the political party it will form a coalition with to run the Fiji government for the next four years.

    The decision came after hours of deliberation today by the Sodelpa working committee — headed by party acting deputy leader Aseri Radrodro — where members discussed the “anomalies” in the previous board meeting held at the Yue Lai Hotel in Suva on Tuesday.

    That meeting of the 30-member board decided by a margin of 16-14 to form a coalition with the People’s Alliance party of former prime minister Sitiveni Rabuka and the National Federation Party. This would give the coalition a slender majority of 29 in the 55-seat Parliament.

    However, some issues were identified by the Registrar of Political Parties, Mohammed Saneem, after that Sodelpa board meeting.

    Speaking to news media today, Radrodro said the agenda of the new meeting was to decide which party they would join.

    The meeting will be held at the Southern Cross Hotel in Suva at 10am tomorrow.

    Sodelpa’s negotiating team will be headed by party vice-president Anare Jale.

    Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.

    Military forces deployed
    Meanwhile, RNZ Pacific reports that Fiji’s military forces are being deployed to maintain security and stability in the country following reports of threats made against minority groups.

    In a statement yesterday afternoon, Fiji Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho announced the move, calling it a joint decision with the commander of Fiji’s military forces, Major-General Jone Kalouniwai.

    Fiji Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho
    Fiji Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho . . . reports and intelligence received of planned civil unrest and the targeting of minority groups. Image: Fiji police/RNZ Pacific

    As of 3pm Fiji time, RNZ Pacific’s correspondent in Suva, Kelvin Anthony, reported there were no visible signs of increased police or military presence.

    Commissioner Qiliho said the decision was based on official reports and intelligence received of planned civil unrest and the targeting of minority groups.

    The military deployment comes less than 24 hours after the ruling FijiFirst party made its first public statement since the December 14 election.

    Party secretary-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said they respected the outcome of the election, but did not recognise the validity of the opposition coalition and would not concede defeat.

    Sayed-Khaiyum said under the country’s constitution, the FijiFirst government remained in place and Voreqe Bainimarama was still the prime minister of Fiji.

    He said this could only be changed once the vote for prime minister was held on the floor of Parliament.

    Under section 131 (2) of Fiji’s constitution, the military has the “overall responsibility” to ensure the security, defence and wellbeing of Fiji and all Fijians.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

  • Listen to a reading of this article:

    The US military has been showering CNN’s retiring Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr with effusive thanks and praise for her lifetime of service, giving some insight into the cozy working relationship between the media and the war machine inside the US empire.

    “Today closes a remarkable career for CNN’s Barbara Starr, a leader in the Pentagon Press Corps,” reads a post by the Twitter account for US Central Command. “Her aggressive reporting and tireless commitment to the truth brought this Nation closer to its military. She will forever be missed.”

    Starr received a standing ovation at a Pentagon press briefing on Tuesday after Pentagon Press Secretary Pat Ryder sang her praises and thanked her for two decades on the job.

    “I’d like to take this opportunity to say farewell to our media colleague, Miss Barbara Starr,” Ryder said. “Barbara has reported for CNN for over 20 years, and has been a fixture in the Pentagon Press Corps, and today marks her final day with CNN after a storied and fully-impressive — excuse me — truly impressive career.”

    “So Barbara, on behalf of Secretary of Defense Austin, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Milley and the entire Department of Defense, I would like to extend a special congratulations and thank you for your many years of timely, insightful and important reporting on our nation’s most pressing defense issues,” Ryder continued. “And as someone who has worked with you for many of those last 20 years and someone who has had to take your late-night phone calls and emails and answer your tough, but fair questions, I can say from personal experience that the U.S. public and audiences worldwide have been well served by your in-depth reporting from the Pentagon, your journalistic integrity and your determination to tell the stories of service members worldwide, and to ensure the government and DOD remain transparent and accountable to the taxpayers and the American public they serve. Congratulations again, and we wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors.”

    “You know Department of Defense better then [sic] most. We will miss you ! Thanks for your service to our Democracy! Free Independent Press !”, retired lieutenant general Russel L. Honoré told Starr on Twitter.

    I actually can’t think of a clearer sign that the US does not have a “free independent press” than for the US military to be gushing affectionately about the career of a longtime CNN Pentagon correspondent, myself. And I can’t think of a more disgraceful way for a journalist to retire than with a standing ovation at the Pentagon.

    Surely there can be no clearer a mark of journalistic failure than being thanked by the US military for your lifetime of service. If your journalistic relationship with the corrupt and murderous US military was ever anything other than oppositional, and their feelings toward you anything but hostile, it’s because you were never a journalist. You were their PR agent.

    And indeed one need only look at Starr’s output over the course of her career to know that this was the case. Watch her uncritically parroting US government claims about chemical weapons in Syria. Watch the infomercial-like way she reports on US “war on terror” activity in the Middle East. Watch her enthusing about what a “win” the capture of Muammar Gaddafi was for the United States. Watch her finger-wagging at the president of the Philippines after he verbally insulted the president of the United States. Compare the way she talks about allegations of Russian war crimes and US war crimes.

    “I’ve been listening to her for years, and I can’t recall a single time she wasn’t just reading a Pentagon press release,” tweeted activist Steve Patt.

    The US military has such adoration for Barbara Starr because she is a war propagandist, just like the rest of the mainstream western news media who report on US foreign policy. And the Pentagon was joined by Starr’s fellow propagandists in celebrating her storied career.

    “You are so well-respected, not only here at CNN but in the broader community of journalists — I know how well-respected you are at the Pentagon,” anchor Erica Hill told Starr on CNN.

    “CNN and our viewers have benefited greatly from her truly extraordinary reporting skills and her deep knowledge of the US military, that I truly appreciate as a former CNN correspondent myself,” said CNN’s Wolf Blitzer during his farewell to Starr.

    “So well deserved. Barbara was one of the best journalists I worked with at CNN. A Pentagon legend,” tweeted Murdoch pundit Piers Morgan.

    This is everything that is wrong with news media in the western world. Journalists are supposed to hold power to account with the light of truth, and that cannot happen if they are building warm, affectionate relationships with the people they’re meant to be aggressively scrutinizing. If the public is getting their information about the workings of the most powerful military force ever assembled by people who are friendly with and sympathetic to that military force, then they cannot possibly be getting accurate information about it. The press cannot possibly be ensuring that “the government and DOD remain transparent and accountable to the taxpayers and the American public they serve.”

    And that is of course the point. The mass media of the western world do not exist to inform, they exist to misinform. To create a compliant and obedient populace who doesn’t interfere with the mechanisms of empire or the violence necessary for upholding it. To, as CENTCOM so aptly put it, bring the nation closer to its military.

    That was Barbara Starr’s entire job, it will be the job of whoever replaces her, and it will be the job of everyone else in the Pentagon press room with them.

    ________________

    My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on FacebookTwitterSoundcloud or YouTube, throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fiPatreon or Paypal, or buying an issue of my monthly zine. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my American husband Tim Foley.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    This post was originally published on Caitlin Johnstone.

  • PNG Post-Courier

    Papua New Guinea Defence Force commander Major-General Mark Goina has issued a warning to all serving members of the PNGDF to “shape up or ship out”.

    In light of the up coming Christmas and New Year operations, the commander has said that all soldiers — regardless of where they are serving — must conduct themselves in a disciplined manner.

    In an interview with the Post-Courier, Major-General Goina said: “We issued certain instructions for behaviour.

    “My advice to the servicemen and women, if you are drinking [and] under the influence of liquor, ensure you go back home and rest, don’t try to go out and do something you will regret, get yourself into trouble or it will be life threatening to you.

    “My message is very clear: ‘if you drink go back home and rest, if you drink, don’t drive.’

    “I do not want to see any PNGDF [servicemen] drunk and driving, and due to your recklessness cause the life of other persons.

    Such behaviour ‘not tolerated’
    I want to make this clear if you get into a fight [and] you injure a civilian or damage public property.

    “I will not tolerate that kind of behaviour, and causing injuries to civilians.”

    The message by the PNGDF commander is not new and has been repeated by every commander that has come and gone. However, it has fallen on deaf ears.

    The Post-Courier understands that the issue of such directives is always been part of the working life of any soldier.

    ‘This end of year Post-Courier hopes such issues will not pop up again and we will be watching.”

    Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Timoci Vula in Suva

    The People’s Alliance Party took an early lead in the Fiji general election vote tally this evening with a total of 21,810 votes recorded after the completion of counting from 470 of the 2071 polling stations.

    The governing FijiFirst Party was in second place with 16,515 votes and SODELPA running third with 3684 votes.

    The National Federation Party followed with 3256 votes and Unity Fiji in fifth place with 1688 votes.

    FIJI ELECTIONS 2022
    FIJI ELECTIONS 2022

    The other results by party as at the 5pm update provided by the Fijian Elections Office are:

    Fiji Labour Party – 1269
    We Unite Fiji Party – 1179
    All Peoples Party – 614
    New Generation Party – 175
    Rajendra Sharma (Independent) – 26
    Ravinesh Reddy (Independent) – 21

    The top five candidates at that update were:

    Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama – 11,248
    Sitiveni Ligamamada Rabuka – 6738
    Lynda Diseru Tabuya – 1397
    Siromi Dokonivalu Turaga – 1048
    Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum – 927

    Counting continues at the National Count Centre and the next update is due to be provided by the Supervisor of Elections at 10pm.

    Timoci Vula is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

    Fiji’s military will respect electoral process – Kalouniwai
    RNZ Pacific reports that the Fiji military commander has rejected a request by opposition party leaders to intervene in a dispute over the country’s election process.

    Major-General Jone Kalouniwai said the military (RFMF) as an institution would put its trust in the electoral process.

    “I wish to reassure the people of Fiji that the RFMF will not respond to [PAP leader Sitiveni ] Rabuka’s insistence or any political party, that we intervene under our responsibilities from Section 131.2 of the 2013 Constitution,” Kalouniwai said.

    “The constitutional responsibility of the RFMF section 131.2 does not make any reference to intervening or getting involved with the electoral processes or management of voting or counting of votes with the assistance of the military.”

    Kalouniwai explained that using the military in any form during the electoral process was unconstitutional.

    The statement came after a group of opposition party leaders called for a halt to vote counting yesterday, demanding an audit of the country’s electoral system.

    It was triggered by an anomaly in provisional results that was displayed on a Fiji Election Office results app on Wednesday night.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

  • 1. Prologue

    March 2019 • Rodat District, Nangarhar Province

    This story contains graphic descriptions and images of war casualties.

    On a December night in 2018, Mahzala was jolted awake by a shuddering wave of noise that rattled her family’s small mud house. A trio of helicopters, so unfamiliar that she had no word for them, rapidly descended, kicking up clouds of dust that shimmered in their blinding lights. Men wearing desert camouflage and black masks flooded into the house, corralling her two sons and forcing them out the door.

    Mahzala watched as the gunmen questioned Safiullah, 28, and 20-year-old Sabir, before roughly pinning them against a courtyard wall. Then, ignoring their frantic protests of innocence, the masked men put guns to the back of her sons’ heads. One shot. Two. Then a third. Her youngest, “the quiet, gentle one,” was still alive after the first bullet, Mahzala told me, so they shot him again.

    Her story finished, Mahzala stared at me intently as if I could somehow explain the loss of her only family. We were in the dim confines of her home, a sliver of light leaking in from the lone window above her. She rubbed at the corner of her eyes; her forehead creased by a pulsing vein. The voices of her sons used to fill their home, she told me. She had no photos of them. No money. And there was no one who would tell her, a widow in her 50s, why these men dropped out of the sky and killed her family or acknowledge what she insisted was a terrible mistake.

    But now there was me. I had ended up in Rodat in the heart of Nangarhar province while researching my own family’s story of loss in this desolate rural region in eastern Afghanistan.

    Mahzala’s neighbors had pressed me to meet her; I was a foreigner, I must be able to help. Three months had passed since the raid. The neighbors believed it was the work of the feared Zero Units — squadrons of U.S.-trained Afghan special forces soldiers. Two more homes in the area were targeted that night, they said, though no one else was killed. Everyone acknowledged the Taliban had been in the area before; they were everywhere in Nangarhar province. But Mahzala’s sons? They were just farmers, the neighbors told me.

    Dusk in Nangarhar province (Lynzy Billing for ProPublica)

    That trip was the first time I’d heard of the secretive units, which I’d soon learn were funded, trained and armed by the CIA to go after targets believed to be a threat to the United States. There was something else: The Afghan soldiers weren’t alone on the raids; U.S. special operations forces soldiers working with the CIA often joined them. It was a “classified” war, I’d later discover, with the lines of accountability so obscured that no one had to answer publicly for operations that went wrong.

    Back in Kabul, I tried to continue my personal hunt, but Mahzala’s story had changed the trajectory of my journey. Her words and her face, with its deep-set wrinkles that mirrored the unforgiving landscape, lingered in my thoughts. Who were these soldiers? And what were they doing in remote farming villages in Afghanistan executing young men under the cover of night? Did anyone know why they were being killed?

    As a journalist, I knew that Afghanistan’s story was most often told by outsiders, by reporters with little cause to explore barren corners like Rodat. Far from the world’s eyes, this story felt like it was being buried in real time. It was clear no one would be coming to question what happened that night or to relieve Mahzala’s torment.

    Mahzala’s sons’ lives, it seemed, were being shrugged away, without acknowledgement or investigation, disappearing into the United States’ long war in Afghanistan. I began to focus on a basic question: How many more Mahzalas were there?

    As I write this today, America’s war in Afghanistan is already being consigned to history, pushed from the world’s consciousness by humanity’s latest round of inhumanity. But there are lessons to be learned from the West’s failures in Afghanistan. Other reporters, notably at The New York Times, have documented the cover-up of casualties from aerial bombardment and the drone war in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. This story is a deep look inside what happened after America embraced the strategy of night raids — quick, brutal operations that went wrong far more often than the U.S. has acknowledged.

    As one U.S. Army Ranger ruefully told me after the Taliban’s triumph last year: “You go on night raids, make more enemies, then you gotta go on more night raids for the more enemies you now have to kill.”

    2. Getting Started

    May 2019 • Kabul

    Although I hadn’t revealed it to Mahzala, I’d come to Afghanistan hoping to answer questions similar to her own.

    Like Mahzala, I’m from Afghanistan. People call me “lucky” because I was adopted by a British family running a school across the border in Pakistan. At age 12, I moved with them to Israel and then on to England, where I attended university and later became a journalist. I had a few traces of my Afghan and Pakistani origins: a couple photographs of my biological mother — a Pakistani, young and lovely with hands like my own — a newspaper clipping advertising me, an orphan girl, for adoption and a few other scraps of information. But really, I had nothing.

    I’d returned to Afghanistan as an adult, and with plans to also go to Pakistan, to investigate my past: Who were my birth parents? And what had happened to them? I was spurred by a mix of emotions from curiosity to a desire for closure.

    Thirty years earlier, when I was 2, my mother, a refugee to Afghanistan, and younger sister were killed in a nighttime raid in the very same district as Mahzala’s sons — long before the Americans arrived. Like her, I also had no answers. A distant relative told me that my Afghan father was likely the intended target of the attack. He would be killed two years later during the increasingly violent civil conflict, but the people who murdered my mother and sister would never be held to account. One war bled into the next, and one family’s story of loss was replaced by another’s.

    Lynzy Billing’s biological mother (Courtesy of Lynzy Billing)

    Trauma, I’ve learned, creates a rippling pool; its ravages spread to unseen edges. After I was adopted, I underwent numerous medical and psychological assessments. One declared that I’d had a “neurological insult” likely from an incident of trauma to the brain. I have no idea when or with what I was hit. The doctors observed that I had an “abnormal gait” that stymied my ability to run and a string of learning disabilities that affected my speech and my ability to interact with others. Doctors suggested that my adoptive father slowly push me on a swing to introduce me to movement. But I’d shut down and go rigid or, with white knuckles gripping the swing, scream.

    My adoptive father recalls some friends suggesting that I “had demons and wouldn’t be at rest until they were cast out.”

    Even as my physical and psychological ailments faded, questions of my origins taunted me. My personality and interests didn’t match those of my adoptive sisters. I was hardheaded, self-contained and struggled to show affection toward the people I loved. I had difficulty expressing my thoughts and feelings. Friends would ask me why I made things so difficult for myself. I didn’t have an answer.

    I was middle of the road in most things in school and struggled to find my place among sisters who excelled academically and athletically. Although I did indeed feel “lucky,” I also felt an overwhelming pressure to make the most of the opportunities I’d been given.

    In truth, I never felt British, Afghan or Pakistani. I tried to hire private investigators to find my birth parents. A slick businessman in a dodgy one-room London office above a bakery laughed off my request. A beefy man in hobnail cowboy boots met me at a swanky hotel in Dubai, then said he was reluctant to take on such a small but difficult job. No one was interested in digging around in a country at war.

    And so I set out to Jalalabad to do it myself.

    Billing traveling through Nangarhar province in eastern Afghanistan, first image. Achin district, Nangarhar province. (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    I learned from my conversation with Mahzala that the violence that tore apart my family had continued as Afghanistan lurched from civil war to a grinding conflict between the U.S. and the Taliban, al-Qaida and later ISKP (Islamic State Khorasan Province, the Afghan offshoot of the Islamic State). As I made calls and sifted through local news reports, my focus shifted from exploring my personal story to something else.

    Over the next three and a half years, I did what it appeared that no one else was doing — nor will be able to do again — I tracked what the U.S.-trained and sponsored squads were doing on the ground, concealed from most of the world.

    I cataloged hundreds of night raids by one of the four Zero Unit squads, which was known in Afghanistan as 02 unit, eventually identifying at least 452 civilians killed in its raids over four years. I crisscrossed hundreds of miles of Nangarhar interviewing survivors, eyewitnesses, doctors and elders in villages seldom, if ever, visited by reporters. The circumstances of the civilian deaths were rarely clear. But the grieving families I spoke to in these remote communities were united in their rage at the Americans and the U.S.-backed Kabul government.

    My pursuit would take me from the palatial Kabul home of the former head of Afghanistan’s spy agency to clandestine meetings with two Zero Unit soldiers who were ambivalent about their role in America’s war. It would lead me back to the United States, where I met an Army Ranger in a diner in a bland middle American city. Over breakfast, he casually described how American analysts calculated “slants” for each operation — how many women/children/noncombatants were at risk if the raid went awry. Those forecasts were often wildly off, he acknowledged, yet no one seemed to really care.

    My reporting showed that even the raids that did end in the capture or killing of known militants frequently also involved civilian casualties. Far too often, I found the Zero Unit soldiers acted on flawed intelligence and mowed down men, women and children, some as young as 2, who had no discernible connection to terrorist groups.

    And the U.S. responsibility for the Zero Unit operations is quietly muddied because of a legal carve-out that allows the CIA — and any U.S. soldiers lent to the agency for the operations — to act without the same oversight as the American military.

    The CIA declined to answer my questions about the Zero Units on the record. In a statement, CIA spokesperson Tammy Thorp said, “As a rule, the U.S. takes extraordinary measures — beyond those mandated by law — to reduce civilian casualties in armed conflict, and treats any claim of human rights abuses with the utmost seriousness.”

    She said any allegations of human rights abuses by a “foreign partner” are reviewed and, if valid, the CIA and “other elements of the U.S. government take concrete steps, including providing training on applicable law and best practices, or if necessary terminating assistance or the relationship.” Thorp said the Zero Units had been the target of a systematic propaganda campaign designed to discredit them because “of the threat they posed to Taliban rule.”

    Forward Operating Base Fenty in Jalalabad, Nangarhar province, in 2019, when it was the headquarters for the 02 unit (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    My reporting, based on interviews with scores of eyewitnesses and with the Afghan soldiers who carried out the raids, shows that the American government has scant basis for believing it has a full picture of the Zero Units’ performance. Again and again, I spoke with Afghans who had never shared their stories with anyone. Congressional officials concerned about the CIA’s operations in Afghanistan said they were startled by the civilian death toll I documented.

    As my notebooks filled, I came to realize that I was compiling an eyewitness account of a particularly ignominious chapter in the United States’ fraught record of overseas interventions.

    Without a true reckoning of what happened in Afghanistan, it became clear the U.S. could easily deploy the same failed tactics in some new country against some new threat.

    3. Visiting the Raids

    May – October 2019 • Nangarhar Province

    When I conceived this investigation, I knew if I was going to track the dead, I’d need some help. I met Muhammad Rehman Shirzad, a 34-year-old forensic pathologist from Nangarhar.

    As a government employee, Shirzad had access to official records to verify the identities of those killed. But helping me was a risk. Nevertheless, he was keen to join. “We have to share the truth,” he told me. We began building a database of alleged civilian casualties and hit the road.

    Muhammad Rehman Shirzad, a forensic pathologist from Nangarhar, helped build a database of alleged civilian casualties. (Lynzy Billing for ProPublica)

    In the late spring of 2019, the trail led to the basement office of Lutfur Rahman, 28, former university professor who’d found himself unexpectedly chronicling the stories of Zero Unit survivors. He’d taught literature but had also acted as a counselor to young men with no one else to talk to.

    “Nangarhar is the most restless province,” Rahman said. “They witness these raids every day.” He handed me a beat-up notebook. Inside were 14 stories of deadly Zero Unit raids that his students had described to him over two years.

    We’d just started talking when Rahman got a call from a professor at the University of Nangarhar who said one of his students had missed classes for several days and then returned distracted and distressed, saying there’d been “an incident.”

    A few days later, I found Batour, 22, in the university’s science lab, sitting sandwiched between plastic models of dissected human bodies. Slight, disheveled and with wild eyes, he looked lost. I suggested that we move to the privacy of the roof. He didn’t have to talk to me, I said. “It’s OK,” he said, then took a deep breath and cocked his chin, as if bracing for a blow.

    They came a week earlier, on April 26. “It was a normal Thursday,” Batour said. He and his brothers prayed at the mosque and then returned to their home in Qelegho in Khogyani district. As Batour spoke, his skinny ankles swayed back and forth, not quite reaching the ground.

    Around 9 p.m., he said, the 02 soldiers descended from helicopters and he knew a raid had started. They hit four houses before reaching his home hours later and “blew up the door.”

    A soldier with a megaphone announced: “Your house is surrounded. Come out.” Inside, soldiers were asking everyone: “What is your name? What do you do?”

    Batour and his father were led out of the house while his two brothers remained inside.

    Two soldiers were speaking in English, he said, but there was a man with them translating their words into Pashto. Batour told them he was a student at the university and gave them his university ID. The soldiers checked his name against a list, he said, then ordered him to sit under a tree. As long as the planes are circling above, they told him, do not move.

    Batour, 22, witnessed the raid in which two of his brothers were killed. (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    Batour paused and stared at his hand, flexing his fingers.

    “My back was to the house and I don’t know how long I was sitting there,” he said quietly, but that’s when he heard the sound of firing. “It was just like pop-pops, so it was silenced guns.” Batour heard the helicopters take off. “Immediately my father ran to the house screaming, but I couldn’t hear him. I ran after him. My father said: ‘Come on. They are finished.’”

    They found his two brothers dead. They’d been shot many times.

    That night, 11 people were killed including Batour’s brothers: Sehatullah, 28, a teacher at a secondary school in Khogyani district, left behind a wife and three young sons, and Khalid Hemat, 26, who went to university with Batour, had married just four months earlier.

    Khalid, first image, and Sehatullah, Batour’s brothers, were killed in a night raid. (Photographs courtesy of Batour)

    The following day, Batour heard the local radio station announce that teachers from a government school were killed in the raid by the 02 unit. There was no mention that insurgents had been successfully eliminated.

    “While my brothers were alive, I was free to study. But now they are gone; no one is here to support me. My lessons are left half-completed.” He told me he can’t concentrate and has nightmares about the night of the raid, but his family can’t afford to move from the village. “We still don’t know the reason my brothers were slaughtered.”

    Batour believes the Zero Unit strategy had actually made enemies of families like his. He said his brothers had both supported the government and he did, too, vowing never to join the Taliban. Now, he said, he’s not so sure. As Batour spoke, something round and black dropped onto the roof by his feet. He briefly cowered, before realizing it was a taped-up black cricket ball that soared up from the ground floor. After a moment he exhaled. It’s as if he’d forgotten to breathe the whole time we were talking.

    As Batour told me his story, I heard echoes of the other witnesses I had spoken to about the psychological toll of the raids. As long as most of them could remember, the country had been racked by violence. The hum of drones, the whirr of helicopters and the deafening blasts of suicide bombings and missile strikes had scarred the land and seeped into daily life.

    Kurdish-German psychologist Jan Ilhan Kizilhan trains psychologists who specialize in trauma to work with war victims in Iraq and Syria. He told me that in Afghanistan trauma has become an inescapable legacy. “They experience past trauma again and again as if it is immediate,” he said. “The repetition reinforces these experiences many times over, keeping them alive for numerous future generations.”

    A raid in Qala Sheikh village in Chaparhar district left five teachers dead and a trail of destruction. (Photograph courtesy of Abdul Rahim)

    At the more than 30 raid sites Shirzad and I visited, we were often greeted with surprise, particularly by women, who had seldom been asked about what they’d seen and, if they were victims, sometimes not mentioned. One 60-year-old woman told me that after her three sons and son-in-law were killed in a July 2019 night raid, she simply washed, shrouded and buried them. At the provincial governor’s office, she was told that the 02 conducted the operation and “it was a mistake.”

    “Not once did I think I had any other options, that any Afghan official, court or anyone would believe me,” she said.

    In Qala Sheikh village in Chaparhar district, more than a dozen people witnessed Zero Unit soldiers shoot five teachers in their homes, leaving behind the blackened shell of one home with two burned bodies inside.

    The 02 unit later said it carried out the raid in a statement, announcing that the men were ISKP members — a claim Abdul Rahim, who saw his brother and nephews burning in the fire, denied. “If they were ISIS, why didn’t they arrest them in the city where they teach at government schools?” Rahim said that October. “It’s the obligation of the Afghan government to ask this unit why they are killing civilians.”

    Rahim told me that a presidential delegation had traveled to Jalalabad, ostensibly to investigate the raid, but it never came to Qala Sheikh or spoke to witnesses or the doctors who treated his brother’s injuries before he died.

    4. A Failed Strategy

    1967 – Present Day

    U.S. military and intelligence agencies have long used night raids by forces like the 02 to fight insurgencies and since the Vietnam War have defended the tactic, arguing that the raids are less likely to cause civilian casualties than aerial bombing.

    But even a cursory review of U.S. military history raises serious questions about the operations, especially in places like Afghanistan, which is defined by deep tribal loyalties and where the high civilian death toll has, time and again, turned people against the United States and the local government it supported.

    In 1967, the CIA’s Phoenix Program famously used kill-capture raids against the Viet Cong insurgency in south Vietnam, creating an intense public blowback. William Colby, then-CIA executive director and former chief of the Saigon station, conceded to Congress in 1971 that it wasn’t possible to differentiate with certainty between enemy insurgents or people who were neutral or even allies.

    Despite the program’s ignominious reputation — a 1971 Pentagon study found only 3% of those killed or captured were full or probationary Viet Cong members above the district level — it appears to have served as a blueprint for future night raid operations.

    The U.S. used night raids against al-Qaida in Iraq, under Gen. David Petraeus and Gen. Stanley McChrystal. Military officials said many of the operations killed or captured their targets. But it’s impossible to determine how often the intelligence was wrong, or misguided, and civilians paid the price. As in Afghanistan, complete casualty data has remained either classified, unavailable or untracked.

    Gen. Stanley McChrystal, at right in first image, and Gen. David Petraeus, second image (First image: Manan Vatsyayana/Stringer/Getty Images. Second image: Chris Hondros/Getty Images.)

    When McChrystal took over operations in Afghanistan in June 2009, he declared that Afghan officials would now take part in the planning and execution of the raids, but he also accelerated them. As in Iraq, the raids were met with protests, and former President Hamid Karzai repeatedly called for them to be banned.

    The raids, along with drone strikes, were part of America’s vast counterterrorism apparatus known as the “kill-capture program.” When Petraeus replaced McChrystal in Afghanistan, he expanded the program and in 2010 released figures to the media claiming spectacular success — thousands of al-Qaida and Taliban leaders captured or killed.

    In a subsequent press conference, a U.S. admiral revealed that more than 80% of those captured “terrorists” were released within weeks because there wasn’t supportable evidence that they were insurgents. And the raids seemed counterproductive: as they ramped up, so did the insurgent attacks.

    Petraeus and McChrystal declined to answer questions for this story.

    Meanwhile, the CIA was separately funding, training and equipping its own series of paramilitary forces in Afghanistan. The Zero Units were officially established around 2008, according to Afghan officials and soldiers, and modeled on U.S. special operations forces like the Navy SEALs. Regionally based and staffed by local soldiers, the units were sometimes accompanied by CIA advisers, transported by American helicopters and aided by armed support aircraft.

    Afghan forces conducted nighttime operations in 2019. (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    Sandwiched between bomb blasts and attacks on government institutions by insurgents, the Zero Units, whose members are estimated to be in the thousands, received scant scrutiny until 2013. Under the Trump administration, CIA Director Mike Pompeo announced that the agency was ramping up its approach in Afghanistan: “The CIA, to be successful, must be aggressive, vicious, unforgiving, relentless — you pick the word.”

    The following year, in 2018, The New York Times published a report about the 02 unit using brutal tactics to terrorize Afghans. In October 2019, Human Rights Watch documented 14 cases — some amounting to war crimes — involving the 02 unit and other CIA-backed strike forces. In 2020, The Intercept reported on 10 night raids by another Zero Unit, 01, that targeted religious schools.

    While the stories described deadly raids, not much was said about why the intelligence guiding them was often flawed. It appeared to be a pattern that went hand in hand with the night raid strategy. I spoke with two self-proclaimed “geeks” who helped build or operate spy technology during the peak years of war. They said failure was predictable, despite the huge advances in technical intelligence. The most cutting-edge equipment in the world, they said, didn’t make up for the deficits in understanding “the enemy” by the Americans processing the intelligence.

    Lisa Ling spent 20 years in the military and built technology that was ultimately used to process intelligence that targeted Afghans. “I understand very viscerally how this tech works and how people are using it,” she said. The counterterrorism mission is essentially: “Who am I fighting, and where will I find them,” she said. But the U.S. struggled to differentiate combatants from civilians, she said, because it never understood Afghanistan.

    Her thoughts echoed what I’d heard from Afghan intelligence officials. “Every gun-wielding guy in this country is not a Talib because people in rural Afghanistan carry guns,” said Tamim Asey, former deputy minister of defense and Afghan National Security Council director general.

    In Afghanistan, Air Force technician Cian Westmoreland built and maintained the communications relays that underpinned America’s drone program. His grandfather’s distant cousin was Gen. William Westmoreland, a key architect of the night raid operations in Vietnam. His father was a technical sergeant and, Cian said, “ordered the missile parts for the initial bombing of Afghanistan.”

    It became clear to Westmoreland that civilian casualty reports from the drone strikes sent up the chain of command were inaccurate. “Unless there are operators physically checking body parts on the ground, they have no idea how many civilians were killed,” he said. “And they have no idea how many ‘enemies’ they actually got.”

    Achin district in Nangarhar province (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    When he finished his deployment in 2010, Westmoreland says he was handed his evaluation, stating that he’d assisted on 200-plus enemy kills in five months. He ran to the bathroom, he said, and threw up. “How many is the plus? Who is counting? And who knows who was killed?”

    A source familiar with the Zero Unit program said it “stayed in close contact with a network of tribal elders,” who alerted program officials when civilians were killed. Any such deaths, the source said, were “unintended.”

    At times, Westmoreland said, bystanders paid the price simply because they were near a suspected target’s cellphone.

    Speaking with them, it became clear that the language of the intelligence world itself could hide its weaknesses. Ling said that when intelligence officers cite “multiple sources” of intelligence to justify an operation, it doesn’t necessarily mean they have confirmatory information. It could simply mean that they have an overhead image of a house and an informant telling them who’s inside.

    5. The Zero Unit Soldiers

    October 2019 • Kabul

    For six months, I pursued the most elusive perspective on the U.S. night raid strategy — the Zero Unit soldiers themselves; the men killing their own compatriots on U.S. orders.

    In October 2019, two men whom I’ll call Baseer and Hadi finally agreed to meet me. Both in their mid-30s, they were friends, fathers and comrades-in-arms. Hardened by violence and the isolation of the Zero Units, they were initially baffled by my interest, not just because they feared discovery. Why would I want to talk to killers? They decided to speak, they said, because of their unease with missions gone awry — and their distrust of the motives of those directing the attacks. I agreed to protect their identities.

    Baseer and Hadi describe their work in one of the Zero Units in a scene from a ProPublica documentary coming in 2023. (Illustration and animation by Mauricio Rodríguez Pons/ProPublica. Field production by Lynzy Billing, Muhammad Rehman Shirzad and Kern Hendricks for ProPublica. Music by Milad Yousufi for ProPublica.)

    Watch video ➜

    “They are Americans killing Afghans, and we are Afghans killing Afghans,” Baseer told me. “But I know the Americans do not lie awake at night with the guilt I have.”

    Clouds of cigarette smoke swirled through shafts of sunlight in the dimly lit backroom of a quiet fish restaurant on the outskirts of Kabul where we finally met. Outside, the day’s first light paled into a gray glare glinting off gridlocked cars waiting to pass through fortified checkpoints into the capital.

    Baseer sat cross-legged on the well-worn carpet, balancing a cellphone on each knee and grasping a cup of green tea between his jeweled fingers. His neat mustache caught a bead of sweat as it dripped from his brow. His impeccable grooming was at odds with the mismatched socks peeking from beneath his shalwar kameez.

    He took a long drag on his cigarette, and I noticed finger-sized bruises stretching around his neck. Although he caught me looking at the bruises, he made no effort to explain them. He rolled his neck from side to side to loosen kinks and rubbed his hands together. He was eager to talk.

    Baseer during one of his first interviews with Billing in Kabul in 2019. He and a friend decided to speak about serving in a Zero Unit, they said, because of their unease with missions gone awry. (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    Sitting off to one side, Hadi wore a leather bomber jacket (“like Top Gun”) that dwarfs his wiry frame. It was 80 degrees, but Hadi only removed his beanie briefly, to absently rub a long, silvery scar that stretched across the top of his head. He was wary and toyed nervously with the gold watch that hung from his skinny wrist. His eyes darted to the door at every hint of movement.

    According to Baseer, Hadi is the joker of the two. He squeezed his friend’s shoulder reassuringly, grinning at him. “Don’t worry, she’s not American,” he said in Pashto. In an attempt to reassure them, I tell them I am English, not American, and of Afghan and Pakistani descent. Hadi smiled weakly, but it was clear he was unconvinced.

    Both soldiers had obtained leave passes under false pretenses to meet me. The relationship between journalist and soldier seemed to offer them a space where they could discuss their actions — even boast about them when marveling at their superior training and autonomy — because I think they knew I wasn’t going to turn them in or use their stories as leverage.

    Baseer’s family had left Afghanistan when he was 3, during the same fractious conflict that killed my own family. Eventually, his family settled in a refugee camp in Peshawar in Pakistan. Growing up, he considered both the Americans and the Soviets infidels, but he later came to realize that the Taliban have their own cruelties.

    When he returned to Afghanistan at age 16, he lived in yet another refugee camp. “I wanted to be a politician, but there were no jobs.” Baseer eventually became a bodyguard for his father, a police officer, before signing on with the police as well. The poor pay pushed him to join the military and then the 02 unit in late 2016, where he said he was paid about $700 per month in American currency — more than three times what regular soldiers made. He also received eight months of training from Turkish and American soldiers at several locations in Afghanistan. “The 02 had the weapons and power, and I liked the idea of duty related to operations and fighting,” he said.

    Hadi transferred to the 02 from the Afghan commandos in 2017. “It was my dream to join ‘the Infamous Zero Unit,’” he said. “I thought I would be part of building and securing a new Afghanistan, and as the Americans say,” Hadi briefly switched to English, with an American twang: “‘blast them out of their holes’ and ‘send them to hell.’ I wanted to get the bad guys.” He paused. “At first, the thrill was intense. But the job wasn’t this clear in the end. You know, I became the bad guy, or maybe I wanted to be the bad guy all along.” He looked away, fingering a frayed edge of the carpet.

    Once in the units, the men said, it often seemed like they weren’t fighting Afghanistan’s battle at all. The CIA, with the aid of American soldiers on the ground, they said, ran the show. “They point out the targets and we hit them,” Baseer said, adding that about 80 soldiers go on a raid and “10 Americans, sometimes 12, join every operation.”

    “After we return to base, we count how many soldiers were lost,” he said. Many Afghan soldiers have been killed, but not Americans: “They are out of the war.”

    6. The Raid

    December 2019 • Kamal Khel, Logar Province

    Over the weeks, Baseer, Hadi and a third Zero Unit soldier, Qadeer, updated me on their raids. They showed me chaotic videos they’d kept on their phones. Baseer had been keeping a diary, and he began sharing extracts with me.

    At first, he gave me simple reflections: the time he stole the car keys for a joy ride or when they played volleyball and watched Bollywood movies with the Americans at their base. But over time, he began to share stark excerpts that showed he was keeping a count of those killed. One noted that a dead boy reminded him of his own son.

    At an abandoned office one morning, Baseer and Hadi told me about a raid that seemed to haunt them. Hadi took a deep breath. It happened in July 2019 in the remote village of Kamal Khel in Pul-e-Alam district of Logar province, in eastern Afghanistan.

    That night, he said, word had come that a handful of suspected Taliban militants were holed up in Kamal Khel. Thunder from a coming storm rumbled in the distance as he, Baseer and their 70-strong battalion scrambled aboard a fleet of camouflaged, heavily armed Toyota Hilux trucks. Tucked in “the cradle” in the middle, protected, were a dozen men he described as American special forces soldiers.

    An Afghan army checkpoint (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    At 2 a.m. they roared out of the pitted concrete walls of Forward Operating Base Shank, a former U.S. stronghold famed for the sheer volume of Taliban rockets that had battered it. En route, their Afghan commander relayed details about the night’s four targets. As the city’s lights faded, the convoy split, driving into the storm to approach the village from opposite directions. Half a mile outside of Kamal Khel, they left the trucks to approach on foot over the rocky terrain and dry riverbeds.

    As they grew close, their night vision goggles illuminated in fluorescent green hues a handful of family homes. Moving swiftly, they trained their weapons and laser sights on the houses ahead.

    Suddenly, a rocket-propelled grenade shrieked out of the blackness behind them, exploding against one of the trucks. Even under his noise-canceling headset, Baseer said, the blast deafened him. Ears ringing, he and the other soldiers scrambled for cover. As bullets snapped overhead and muzzle flashes erupted from the surrounding darkness, one of the American soldiers gave the order to open fire.

    “Smoke ’em,” an American voice ordered over the radio.

    Baseer said he flattened himself against the mud wall of a nearby home. To his left, a soldier relayed updates to the base. To his right, Hadi squeezed off shot after shot.

    It was 4 a.m. when the echo of gunfire finally subsided. As the first hints of dawn crept over the nearby mountains, the soldiers moved door to door searching for the raid’s targets. The suspected Taliban militants were nowhere to be found. But in a nearby doorway, four bodies lay on the ground — a man, a teenage girl and two children.

    Baseer says he crouched by the bodies, his helmet camera capturing the carnage. The children were so covered in blood that it was difficult to guess their ages. The teenager’s body was twisted at an unnatural angle. “Don’t touch them,” Baseer said his commander ordered, calling the soldiers back to the trucks.

    Baseer and Hadi looked at me angrily. “The militants were not in the target house,” Baseer said. “They were not even inside the village. They had changed location and started firing on us from behind,” he said. He paused and locked eyes with Hadi.

    “I can’t say who killed them, the Americans or us … all of us were shooting,” he said, and there were no Taliban members residing in the compound they targeted. “The intelligence was incorrect. Or the Taliban had better intelligence than us.”

    The raid, though it was like so many others, felt like a tipping point. They returned to the base that night with questions and anger. It was the responsibility of their commander to write the after-action report and send it up the chain of command, and they didn’t know if it included the four dead. After the raid, they asked him if anything would be done about those killed, but they said they never got an answer.

    Instead, they said, all the soldiers on the raid were required to sign a battle damage assessment, prewritten by their superior, along with a nondisclosure agreement. The assessment, Baseer said, noted no civilian casualties.

    “These deaths happened at our hands. I have participated in many raids,” Hadi said, his voice thin and raspy, “and there have been hundreds of raids where someone is killed and they are not Taliban or ISIS, and where no militants are present at all.”

    7. The Former Spy Boss

    September 2020 • Kabul

    The person I really needed to talk to, prominent Afghan officials said, was Rahmatulah Nabil. The former director of the National Directorate of Security had overseen the units during a critical transition period that began in 2012, when the CIA gave the Afghan intelligence agency nominal control. Although Nabil was no longer at NDS, I’d come to learn his ears, and his hands, are everywhere.

    For months, Nabil avoided me, but in September I received a message around 1:30 a.m. telling me to meet him at his Kabul home later that day. I was granted 30 minutes. After navigating a maze of towering, pockmarked blast walls, a taxi dumped me by a nondescript gate in the east of the capital. Nabil was a compromised man, so when I saw six men guarding a gate, I knew I was in the right spot.

    I was buzzed through a series of armored doors and guided into a large basement room by two burly bodyguards. The room was adorned with backlit murals of turquoise lakes under snow-capped mountains. Dozens of velvet chairs lined the walls and a few men milled around at the door. Nabil strode in and took a seat in a chair at the end of the room, larger than the others and with gold trim. He crossed his legs, lit a cigarette and asked if he could use my tea saucer as his ashtray. Before I could answer, he reached over and took it.

    The conversation started easily enough. The CIA, he said, provided the logistics, intelligence and money in cash, and the Zero Units “conduct” the raids and “deliver” the target, with U.S. special operations forces soldiers joining in. If there was an area where the Americans didn’t have a presence, they had the Zero Units to go there for them, he said. “They needed us and we needed them.” Nabil oversaw the units from 2010 — around two years after their founding — until December 2015, except for a short stint as deputy national security adviser.

    Local residents sort through the debris left behind by an 02 unit raid that killed five people. (Photograph courtesy of the families)

    In 2014, with local anger growing over the raids, Nabil said, the U.S. and Afghan governments signed a security agreement that all American operations must be approved by the Afghan government, a protocol that was “followed for a while.” The agreement also gave the units more autonomy to conduct raids of their own.

    Under such an arrangement, I asked, who’s responsible when the Zero Units get it wrong? The U.S., Nabil said matter-of-factly. “If they provided the intelligence, and the intelligence turns out to be false.”

    But he also said that if the system was working, the Afghan government “should take responsibility” because all intelligence is supposed to go through it as well.

    He switched the subject to how he professionalized the Zero Units, instituting a code of conduct after “something really horrible happened” and the government asked him what the rules of engagement were. Soldiers, he explained, killed the wrong target, perhaps because of what he called “personal” problems with local people.

    “Before me,” he said, “they were basically without any laws. The U.S. was under pressure before because these units were misusing their power.” Nabil said the United States’ plan to staff the units with local Afghans who were “cheaper” and knew the area had backfired. The U.S., he said, failed to understand that tribal ties might cause the Afghan soldiers to provide false intelligence or have conflicted allegiances.

    Nabil said he also oversaw the creation of the Afghan National Threat Intelligence Center in 2015. Known as Nasrat, it unified Afghan intelligence used in combat operations with the help of Resolute Support, the NATO-led multinational mission in Afghanistan. “It was because some of these operations went wrong that we put this center together,” he said.

    A home that was raided on the outskirts of Jalalabad (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    I interrupted this mild boasting to tell him that I’d been tracking all the operations that the 02 unit had recently gotten wrong, killing civilians. He turned to face me. Despite some problems, he said firmly, the majority of the operations were correct.

    I told him that I’d seen videos of civilians killed by the 02 unit. Even though he’d left the agency, had he seen those videos?

    Nabil paused and the conversation took a startling shift. “Yeah, but the problem is, nobody takes it seriously.” When these accidents increase, you become used to these deaths, he said, “and then you lose the sense of seriousness. Like when you see blood for the first time, you feel something. Tenth time, nothing.”

    In 2019, I said, I found more deaths due to incorrect targeting or crossfire than any other year, pulling my crumpled notes from my pocket to show him just how many I had found.

    “Yes, I agree,” Nabil interrupted, without looking at my notes, then offered a startling admission: He was aware that the units had been going on operations based on botched intelligence and that the soldiers, the commanders and higher-ups had faced no consequences if civilian deaths resulted. Nabil said he didn’t know how many civilians had been killed. He believed, in the end, that the units were used as tools by both sides, and that their targets were not always legitimate.

    “One of the operations went wrong in Bagrami District and I went to the family myself and said: ‘We are sorry. … We want to be different from the Taliban.’ And I mean we did, we wanted to be different from the Taliban,” he said, trailing off.

    8. No Investigations

    October 2020 • Jalalabad, Nangarhar Province

    After months of searching, the only night raid I could find that the Afghan government said it investigated was one so audacious that it captured the attention of both the current and former Afghan president. The raid killed four brothers, including one who was a legal adviser to the Afghan Senate and another who was a lawyer.

    The night of the September 2019 raid, the family was at their home in Jalalabad, celebrating the recent return of one of the brothers from a religious pilgrimage. Qadir Seddiqi, the eldest brother who worked in the Senate, was in his room sleeping with his 10-day-old son in the crook of his arm. His father was joking with the youngest brother, while the other two drank tea with their mother.

    After the raid, the 02 unit posted pictures on the NDS Facebook page of the brothers with weapons laid across their bodies, declaring that four ISKP militants had been killed. But when Shirzad and I visited in October 2020, family members told us that the photos were staged after the fact.

    The 02 unit posted photographs on the NDS Facebook page of four brothers with weapons on their bodies and their faces redacted.

    Mohammad Ibrahim, who found his nephews that night, believed the staging was to make them look like they had been killed because they had guns. As he talks, Ibrahim is jittery and keeps his head tilted, preoccupied by a helicopter circling above us in the fading light. Accounts of weapons being planted have emerged in several eyewitness reports about controversial operations led by British and Australian troops.

    That night, the Zero Unit soldiers bound the brothers’ hands and wrote their names on pieces of tape they stuck to each man before shooting them, said their cousin Wasiullah. “That was the last time I saw my cousins, with labels on them.”

    Wasiullah said a hood was placed over his head and he and eight others were taken to Forward Operating Base Fenty, the home of the 02, to gather biometrics, including facial images, iris scans and fingerprints. They were then left in a cell overnight, he said.

    A day later, on President Ashraf Ghani’s orders, an investigative team arrived from Kabul. It was joined by prosecutors, the governor and the NDS director. “We gave them evidence,” Ibrahim said, including a bullet that had gone straight through one of the brother’s feet and into the mattress beneath him. One of the brothers was shot in the head and stabbed; another was “shot in the hands and feet and then twice in his head,” Ibrahim said. “His wedding ceremony was only two weeks away. My heart broke.”

    Two of the four brothers killed in the 02 unit raid on their home in Jalalabad (Photographs courtesy of Mohammad Ibrahim, who found his nephews bodies that night)

    A press release issued by the NDS initially claimed that the 02 soldiers targeted alleged members of the Islamic State. Afghan government officials later backtracked and admitted that the brothers were innocent. The provincial government said in a statement that the 02 had conducted the raid.

    After the family protested, Mohammad Masoom Stanekzai, the director of the NDS at the time, resigned. Ghani tweeted that the raid happened despite “previous assurances and changes in guidelines” for operations and declared that there was “zero tolerance for civilian casualties.” He ordered the attorney general to investigate the incident immediately “and to bring the perpetrators to justice.”

    Family members said they were assured that an investigation would be carried out into the incident but told me they were never contacted again.

    9. Counting the Dead

    November – February 2021 • Kabul

    As my tally of the dead and injured grew, tracking civilian deaths through official American channels was proving nearly impossible. Afghan officials told me they lacked the resources to investigate and reiterated that these were CIA operations. Researchers and experts questioned whether “collateral” deaths could even be tracked, arguing that such a count would be classified.

    Michel Paradis, a national security expert at Columbia Law School and a senior attorney with the Department of Defense, said that civilian deaths during U.S.-Afghan operations can fall into a bureaucratic gray area, with no one interested in claiming casualties they don’t have to.

    Under the international Law of Armed Conflict, the military must differentiate between civilian and combatant, but in Afghanistan civilians and fighters often live in the same villages. I found that civilian casualties could easily be shifted to categories that allow them to be labeled as legitimate kills. In Afghanistan, there are many reasons one would need to protect themself. If a woman picks up a gun because masked men with weapons have invaded her home in the middle of the night, she could be labeled a combatant, involved in “direct participation in hostilities,” despite any other evidence.

    The law specifies that “in case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to be a civilian,” and it’s up to the military to establish “combatant status.” In reality, I found the families of those targeted in Zero Unit raids had no way to prove otherwise. And it was impossible to find out how, or if, the CIA recorded their deaths. And then there were those whose deaths were written off as “collateral.”

    Wasiullah, first image, was detained at the 02 base in Jalalabad after he witnessed the raid on the four brothers. Soahiba, second image, watched as her three sons and son-in-law were shot and killed in an 02 unit raid. Ghulam Rasul, third image, was an eyewitness to the airstrike and night raid that followed in Kamal Khel, Logar province, which killed four members of his family. (First image: Kern Hendricks for ProPublica. Second image: Lynzy Billing for ProPublica. Third image: Kern Hendricks for ProPublica.)

    Two lawyers working for years with whistleblowers on Afghanistan war crimes told me they’d experienced similar roadblocks. “There is not any real desire from the Pentagon or the executive branch to track civilian casualties accurately,” said Jesselyn Radack, a national security and human rights attorney who represented Daniel Hale, a former U.S. Air Force intelligence analyst, among others. Hale was convicted for disclosing classified information that nearly 90% of the people killed by U.S airstrikes in Afghanistan were not the intended targets. Radack said Afghans who were killed because of faulty intelligence or botched raids were often classified as if they were caught in legitimate crossfire or were part of a terrorist group.

    Radack said she’d seen official accounts from operations in Afghanistan in which children killed by mistake were called “TITS,” or terrorists in training. Or, she said, a child “had the wrong father, so he was adjacent to terrorist activities. The ages of children had been changed to make them appear older than they were. … The pressure to make civilian casualties not civilian casualties is pretty intense.”

    By the time the reports get to the congressional oversight committees, she said, they’re “undercounting deaths and overstating accuracy.”

    She and others I spoke to said they believe U.S. officials create the impression that the night raid strategy is effective by “sanitizing,” or removing relevant details from, the reports before they are shared with Congress.

    A CIA official denied this: “When reports — which can be lengthy — are provided to the Hill, they are not ‘sanitized,’ but simply summarized as is regular practice.”

    Congressional aides and former intelligence committee staffers said they don’t believe they’re getting an accurate picture of the CIA’s overseas operations. They added that intelligence committee members who theoretically monitor such operations lack the capacity, and sometimes the willpower, to get information about the programs — or even understand which questions to ask.

    A congressional source on the House Foreign Affairs Committee told me that Congress had also abdicated its authority over the CIA’s operations. “It is really clear that we have backed a lot of groups that did pretty horrific things,” he said. “It benefits people up here to not have to actually deal with these sort of things.”

    Over the years, the task of publicly counting the dead had fallen to human rights organizations, which have produced a series of strongly worded, but largely ineffectual, reports detailing some incidental deaths, summary executions, torture and disappearances resulting from the Zero Units’ night raids. Even so, more than a dozen human rights groups I spoke to conceded it’s nearly impossible to track such incidents, especially those involving civilians.

    The only organization I found that appeared to be consistently attempting to document those killed during raids was the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan. It reported on one raid in which NDS special forces supported by international soldiers entered a medical clinic in 2019 and “shot and killed three civilian males, two of whom worked at the clinic and one of whom was accompanying a patient.” The organization said deaths of civilians during the operations in 2019 were at their highest level since 2009. They found that the 02 unit alone killed 80 civilians and injured 17.

    In trying to count the civilian dead from 02 raids from June 2017 through July 2021, Shirzad and I used news reports, nongovernmental sources and eyewitness reports. We mapped the raids using geographical coordinates and satellite imagery, then used medical records, birth and death certificates, in-person witness interviews and a forensic database to identify the dead.

    An X-ray shows a fatal bullet injury to one of the Zero Units’ victims. (Lynzy Billing for ProPublica)

    At medical facilities, doctors told us they’d never been contacted by Afghan or U.S. investigators or human rights groups about the fate of those injured in the raids. Some of them later died, quietly boosting the casualty count.

    One coroner in Jalalabad described how, at times, 02 soldiers had brought bodies to the morgue themselves, dismissing the staff and using the facilities before leaving with the dead. These deaths were not allowed to be recorded by him or other staff.

    After years of searching, we realized that our resulting tally of at least 452 civilians killed during 107 raids was almost certainly an undercount. In some of these raids, authorities claimed to have killed or captured insurgents, an assertion that is difficult to independently substantiate. There were hundreds of additional operations in which we couldn’t determine if the dead were civilians or militants.

    And this count also does not capture another cost of the raids: all of those who were injured, sometimes suffering permanent disabilities. Among those I met was a young man who’d been struck in the cheek by shrapnel. Unable to afford surgery to remove it, the metal shard migrated to his eye, leaving him partially blind.

    Shirzad and I were overwhelmed. We kept thinking: If this count was from just one of the four units for just four years, what was the full tally?

    10. The Family

    April 2021 • Kabul

    In the spring of 2021, I squeezed into the backseat of a beat-up Toyota Corolla off the highway between Kabul and Jalalabad to tell Baseer and Hadi that I’d finally tracked down what happened in the raid that they had told me about back in October 2019.

    It had taken me a year and a half to find any record corroborating the raid at Kamal Khel despite the four civilians killed. Then I discovered a radio reporter who had gone to the site the following day.

    In Kamal Khel, the relatives of the dead met me and described what happened: That July day, a drone had dropped a missile just outside their mosque, killing 13 people, including Nasibullah, 11, and injuring his cousin Sebghatullah, 18, who died in his brother’s arms on the way to the hospital. Such airstrikes often came in tandem with the ground operations.

    Later that night — when Baseer and Hadi and the Zero Unit descended on their home — the family was still awake, in shock, and mourning their deaths. Nasibullah’s body was cradled in the arms of his grandfather, Ghulam Rasul.

    Chaos ensued in the blaze of explosions and gunfire. Masked soldiers stormed into the house, forcing the men outside to face the courtyard wall until the soldiers had left.

    A scene from a ProPublica documentary coming in 2023 shows the raid from the family’s perspective. (Illustration and animation by Mauricio Rodríguez Pons/ProPublica. Field production by Lynzy Billing, Muhammad Rehman Shirzad and Kern Hendricks for ProPublica. Music by Milad Yousufi for ProPublica.)

    Watch video ➜

    Only then did Rasul find his 16-year-old granddaughter, badly injured in the hand and abdomen, lying on the ground by the bodies of Nasibullah and Sebghatullah. She later died. Her uncle had also been shot in the raid and died from his injuries. Rasul’s wife and a grandson were injured.

    Rasul, who was forced to drop his dead grandson and flee when the shooting started, said that when he protested the killings, the provincial governor told him, “They have their own intelligence and they do their own operation.”

    At the end of the meeting, Rasul told me bitterly, “the provincial governor gave us a parcel of rice, a can of oil and some sugar” as compensation for their loss. But no one ever told the family members why they were targeted or if the Zero Unit had simply got it wrong.

    Baseer said it didn’t make a difference who had killed the family, a drone strike or the unit. “They were just children.” He paused, “I don’t know how in any meaningful way I can say I am sorry to that family. How do I even express it? I can’t.”

    “I have had the feeling many times, you know, when you feel like you’re trapped in a corner, with no way out … but I made the choice, I joined the unit, and there’s nothing I can do to undo it now,” he said.

    Nasibullah, 11, and Sebghatullah, 18, were killed in airstrike and night raid by the 02 unit in Kamal Khel. (Photographs supplied by their grandfather, Ghulam Rasul)

    In the three years I’d spent interviewing Baseer and Hadi, I’d come to see them as flawed soldiers who, in their way, were trying to pull some good out of their lot by sharing what they know, even if it meant exposing their role in killing innocents.

    Hadi said that Afghans lived in fear. “They get killed by all — if it’s 02, if it’s Taliban, ISIS, criminals and others. It’s the same for them. Everyone kills these civilian Afghans.”

    Hadi whispered to himself: “In war, nobody wins. I have caused unforgivable pain on my people. We can’t ignore these deaths. Our minds are damaged, too. So are the Americans’.”

    But neither Baseer or Hadi believed that there would be a day of reckoning for the Zero Units. As our conversation ended, they climbed out of the car and disappeared into the night.

    11. The American

    September 2021 • The Midwest, America

    Early in my reporting, a former U.S. special operations forces member told me that “no one would give a shit” about the killing of Afghan civilians. But it “would be more of a story” if I had American soldiers coming forward. Since then, I’d been searching for an American willing to speak candidly about his time with a Zero Unit.

    It shouldn’t be that hard, I reasoned. The CIA had been pointing Army Rangers and other special operations forces at targets in Afghanistan for more than a decade.

    My conversations with a Ranger I call Jason, who agreed to talk as long as I withheld identifying details about him, started over the phone after he’d left Afghanistan and finished several months later when I traveled to meet him in the United States just two weeks after the final U.S. planes left Kabul. I confirmed his service with one of the units and corroborated his impressions with other Rangers.

    When we first began talking, Jason had recently left a stint with a Zero Unit after six years with two unrelated Afghan special forces units who joined the Rangers on night raids throughout the country. Now he was sitting in a booth in a diner in the heart of the Great Plains watching the Taliban set up their new government more than 7,000 miles away.

    The Department of Defense did not respond to questions about the Zero Unit operations.

    The view from an Afghan army outpost in 2019, first image. Afghan security forces conducting nighttime operations in 2019. (Kern Hendricks for ProPublica)

    He was stocky and trying to sit tall, perhaps to appear taller than he was, even though he wore flip-flops.

    Initially, he was focused, puffing his chest out as he talked. He wanted me to know that he understood Afghanistan. His reasons for joining the fight echoed those of Hadi’s, “to catch the bad guys,” but like his Afghan counterpart, he now wondered if the units’ mission had been squandered. His rage is not over the civilians killed — those, he said, are the cost of war — but for the terrorists left alive.

    I asked him to lead me through how the raids worked and how intelligence could go wrong. “That just happens. If you do enough operations, there’s gonna be some times where it’s not the right person. The intelligence isn’t perfect.”

    As the conversation went on, he began waffling: They didn’t kill civilians. They never botched operations. They just shot back. OK, they did kill them, but they were just collateral.

    I was startled to learn that military planners baked potential “collateral damage” into the pre-raid calculus they prepared from overhead photography and other intelligence. “Ninety percent of the casualties are because you just can’t see them,” Jason said. “We have something we call a slant, which predicts the number of people in the compound. So 3/6/8 is 3 men, 6 women and 8 children. But because the women and children are hidden inside, that slant in reality will end up being 3/14/36, and a lot of times it’s the kids and women who get caught in the crossfire.”

    In other cases, he said, civilians just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. “There’s a time we threw a grenade into a hole where an ISIS guy was,” he said. “But there were a bunch of women and kids and in the crossfire a pregnant woman got shot. She was fine, but obviously the kids’ eardrums exploded and everything like that.”

    During his four months with the Zero Units, Jason said, Americans were often present at every stage of the operation. The questioning of suspects at the scene was done by the Afghan soldiers, and the “verification” of terrorists was typically done by the American soldiers through biometrics “or people at the site of the raid saying they are terrorists.”

    “While the unit did get some known bad guys,” he said, it was also sent after the wrong people or just low-level Taliban to boost their count.

    He initially tells me that every death was accounted for in after-action reports and sent up the chain of command, and that any raid gone wrong was investigated. The reports included “what went well and what went bad and how to fix it,” he said, and were written by senior commanders.

    When I told him that his account conflicts with what I discovered, that the injured often died later or in hospitals and that the dead were sometimes misidentified as insurgents, he paused, then conceded that only those at the scene would know if they counted the dead and if they double-checked who they had killed.

    “I don’t know how many times we said we killed this one Taliban commander before we actually killed him,” he said. “But the U.S. just claimed they got the right guy.”

    12. A Legacy of Terror

    March 2022 • Kabul

    I was working to put the final touches on my reporting when I began to see alarming reports from Afghanistan. City after city had surrendered to the Taliban. U.S. authorities were scrambling to evacuate tens of thousands of Afghans with ties to the American forces from the Kabul airport. The Zero Units had been deployed as a last line of resistance against the Taliban. In the end, they stood arms’ reach from one another securing the airport. Only some Zero Unit members made it out of the country.

    Months later, I returned to see what was left of America’s secret war. Government offices were now inhabited by the Taliban, who targeted enemies much as the Zero Units did. The news archives I’d scoured had been deleted and the statistical records burned. The families of some victims had left the homes that bore the Zero Units’ bullet holes. The Afghan government officials who once brushed me off were now texting me to help them leave the country. And those heavily armed, widely feared Zero Unit trucks? They were now being used by the Taliban, who rode around the streets aimlessly with brand-new, American-made M4 rifles on their laps.

    Children drew helicopters on the wall of a home that was raided by the 02 unit. (Lynzy Billing for ProPublica)

    Baseer is one of those left behind. Our final meeting was at the fish restaurant where we’d first talked three years earlier. He and others who had served with the 02 were living off the grid. The Americans’ promises that they would never abandon their Afghan allies had proven empty.

    After sending me months of desperate texts from different hiding spots, Baseer told me he no longer wants to leave his homeland. He said he realized he fought a messy, failed war for a country that he now believes never cared about Afghanistan. Angry, bitter and disappointed, he wants no part of America.

    His feelings are the same reason that the Taliban grew, he said. “The U.S. and our NDS made a lot of enemies,” he said. “Look at me now. I will never support an American war in Afghanistan again.” (After months on the run, Baseer would later be detained by the Taliban. No one has been able to contact Hadi since the Taliban takeover. He is presumed to have been killed.)

    After the fall of Kabul, my reporting partner and now friend, Shirzad, was airlifted with, ironically, thousands of Zero Unit soldiers and their families to Fort Dix in New Jersey. He was deeply troubled by the units’ killing of Afghans. But amid the foreignness of America, the soldiers were just Afghans like him, lost and frightened. He sounded almost confused by this realization. In December, he was finally allowed to leave Fort Dix to study for a doctorate at an American university.

    Soldiers of the 82nd Airborne at the Kabul airport on Aug. 22, 2021, first image. A destroyed Afghan police truck in 2022, second image. (First image: Kern Hendricks for ProPublica. Second image: Lynzy Billing for ProPublica.)

    I tried to find out what the U.S. was going to do with all the men it had trained to kill with precision. Would it just dump them into America? Or would it find a new use for them?

    Only one of the 02 unit commanders picked up my call. He’d just arrived in Sacramento, California, after five months at a U.S. base and 20 days in a hotel in Los Angeles. There is no plan yet for him or his men. They’d been dispersed across the country, “but our skills and abilities are not being utilized and we are jobless.”

    As for me, the trauma of compiling a body count had taken a toll. As I processed the grief of family after family and the photographs of blood-soaked bodies, I started waking up with bruises on my arms and legs. “It’s a psychosomatic disorder,” a psychologist friend told me. The splotches had started appearing, I realized, when I started sharing my personal story for the first time. It made me wonder what kind of bruises the Zero Units, and America, had left on Afghanistan.

    I was devastated to find out that Mahzala died quietly in her home in December, just days from the anniversary of her sons’ deaths. She never got her answers.

    Neither did I. The path to Pakistan to uncover my mother’s roots still taunts me, as do the questions about what happened the night of the attack that killed her. For now, the answers remain buried under so many other tragedies.

    In the end, I got closure for my own personal story from the unlikeliest source: Baseer. He was not the one who killed my mother and sister, but he was a perpetrator nonetheless. Seeing his remorse, his torment over the hideous things he’d done to his country and his compatriots for someone else’s agenda loosened something in me.

    “It will be good if you leave Afghanistan as soon as possible,” he said, warning of escalating violence. “At first I was thinking: ‘Everyone wants to get a visa to go out. Why do you want to come in?’” As he got up to leave, he turned to me. “I understand it now; I understand you now. You came for your story, not mine.”

    13. Epilogue

    July 2022 • Jalalabad

    In the summer of 2022, I was in Afghanistan on another story when I was approached by a skinny teenager named Spin Ghar who wanted my help reading a letter from the U.S. military. Six years earlier, he told me, he’d been shot by 02 soldiers next to his home outside their base in Jalalabad. He was 12 when it happened, pulling up his shirt to show me scars from three bullet wounds. He still lives next to the once heavily fortified base, which is now empty, except for a lone Talib on his phone.

    After the shooting, he received surgery at two U.S. bases, he said. The 02 soldiers gave his family the commander’s name and number. “They said they would give assistance.”

    He showed me the claim form, which had been filled out in English by the Americans at the base. His age had been bumped up to 14.

    In 2020, they finally received the letter, written in English. I told him the letter said the U.S. military had rejected his claim: “I understand that you suffered a serious injury in the incident, and sympathize with your situation,” wrote Capt. Andrew R. Dieselman, the U.S. foreign claims commissioner at the Jalalabad air base. “Unfortunately, because our investigation determined U.S. Forces were not involved in the incident, I am unable to compensate you.”

    Spin Ghar says he was shot three times when he was 12 by 02 soldiers outside their base in Jalalabad. (Lynzy Billing for ProPublica)

    Spin Ghar looked straight ahead in silence and finally seemed to gather some strength, turning to me and saying, “What should I do now?”

    Resolute Support, which is named on the letterhead, told me my questions are best directed to the CIA.

    As I left Spin Ghar’s home that day, feeling helpless yet again, a woman, his neighbor, rushed toward me, waving a piece of paper. It was a claims card from a U.S. task force. Her sister, she said, “lost her mind” in 2019 after an American drone crashed into their house right next to the base, killing all three of her young children.

    She asked me to take the claims card to the Americans. I told her the Americans have left Afghanistan.

    She looked at me stunned. She had no idea. “When are they coming back?”

    How We Reported This Story

    Sources

    To understand the Zero Units’ operations and their consequences, as well as the CIA’s role in training, funding and directing them, Lynzy Billing traveled hundreds of miles across Nangarhar province, one of the most volatile regions of Afghanistan. She visited the sites of more than 30 night raids of the 02, one of four known Zero Units. She was joined by a forensic pathologist, who used a variety of government records to help verify the identities of the dead.

    She conducted more than 350 interviews with current and former Afghan and U.S. government officials, Afghan and U.S. defense and security officials and former CIA intelligence officers. She spoke with U.S. congressional oversight committee members, counterterrorism and policy officers, civilian-casualty assessment experts, military lawyers, intelligence analysts and representatives of human rights organizations. To unravel what happened at the sites of raids, she interviewed doctors, hospital directors, coroners, forensic examiners, eyewitnesses, family members and village elders. She spoke at length with two active Zero Unit soldiers, an American Ranger who had participated in Zero Unit operations and the former head of Afghanistan’s intelligence agency.

    Billing also reviewed leaked security incident reports from the country’s intelligence agency, police and nongovernmental organizations, and hundreds of local news articles, copies of emails, phone conversations and declassified intelligence files.

    Methodology

    Counting civilian casualties that resulted from CIA-backed operations during the war in Afghanistan proved to be incredibly challenging. It was chaotic. Raid sites were often remote and in dangerous areas, left inaccessible by the fighting. The victims sometimes died later in hospitals from their wounds or were quickly buried without anyone going back to investigate. No one organization was able to keep complete tallies. We set out to catalog the civilians killed during raids by the 02 unit over a four-year-period: June 2017 to July 2021.

    In records and reports, the 02 unit appeared under different names and the raids were at times recorded as “search operations,” but 02 was the only such strike force — identifiable by its tactics, equipment, vehicles and ability to call in U.S. air power — operating in Nangarhar during this time period. In some cases eyewitnesses say the 02 announced themselves to those at the scene.

    We obtained a comprehensive list of the 02 unit operations from a reputable international organization, including dates the raids were conducted, their locations and the number of casualties. We then collected additional alleged civilian casualties from lists kept by human rights organizations, as well as from local news and radio reports and government and police files. We sought corroborating records and eyewitness testimony for each raid.

    Using satellite imagery and geolocation, we were able to verify the locations of many of those raids, especially those accompanied by airstrikes, by searching for evidence of damaged homes and structures. We mapped these against what we found during site visits, such as blown-open doors, burned homes and walls marked by bullet holes, as well as videos of the raids and their destruction obtained from eyewitnesses.

    We traveled to the scenes of more than 30 raids to speak with survivors, eyewitnesses and family members of those killed. To determine who the dead were, we used government statistical department records, IDs and hospital records, which included such details as name, gender, estimated age and tribal affiliation. In some cases, we also found death certificates and coroner reports at the federal forensics department in Kabul.

    ProPublica research reporters reviewed the list of hundreds of raids that Billing brought back from her years of reporting, cross-checking her list against the evidence she’d compiled and publicly available descriptions of the events including news accounts and NGO reports. From there we produced a list of raids and civilian casualties that, while certainly an undercount, was supported by the evidence available to us.

    During the process of visiting villages to corroborate the unit’s night raids, we were continually told about other raids and other deaths. Almost every witness to a raid seemed to know another witness to another raid. We do not believe by any stretch that this is a full accounting of the 02 raids casualties. It is a tally that will now remain unreported and uninvestigated.

    Contributors to this story include: design and development by Anna Donlan, ProPublica; research by Mariam Elba, ProPublica; and fact-checking by Hannah Murphy Winter for ProPublica.

    Contributors to the videos include: illustration and animation by Mauricio Rodríguez Pons, ProPublica; field production by Lynzy Billing, Muhammad Rehman Shirzad and Kern Hendricks for ProPublica; and music by Milad Yousufi for ProPublica.

    This post was originally published on Articles and Investigations – ProPublica.

  • ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

    For more than two decades, the U.S. military has been barred from providing training and equipment to foreign security forces that commit “gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.”

    The law, named for its author, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, applies to military assistance for foreign units funded through the Defense or State departments. Lawmakers including Leahy, a Democrat, acknowledged that it does not cover commando outfits like Afghanistan’s Zero Units.

    In an email, Leahy said he believes that the law’s human rights requirements need to be expanded to “cover certain counter-terrorism operations involving U.S. special forces and foreign partners.

    “U.S. support for foreign security forces, whether through the Department of Defense, Department of State, CIA or other agencies,” Leahy wrote, “must be subject to effective congressional oversight so when mistakes are made or crimes committed, those responsible are held accountable.”

    Leahy called on the Biden administration to apply the law “as a matter of policy” to all overseas military forces that work with any U.S. government agencies.

    Tim Rieser, an aide to Leahy, acknowledged that the Leahy Law “is not all-encompassing, as much as we wish it were.” The Leahy Law, he said, applies only to congressional appropriations that fund the State and Defense departments.

    “Sen. Leahy’s position has always been that the policy should be consistent, that we should not support units of foreign security forces that commit gross violations of human rights regardless of the source of the funds, but that is not what the law says.”

    A source familiar with the Zero Unit program said the CIA’s officers in the field, and special forces soldiers working under their direction, are required to follow the same rules of combat as American service members. The agency does not fall under the Leahy Law.

    U.S. military operations fall under the jurisdiction of the Senate and House Armed Services committees. Congressional oversight of the CIA and other intelligence agencies is handled by separate committees in the House and Senate that hold most of their meetings and hearings in secret. By law, the agencies are required to keep Congress “fully and currently informed” of all covert operations. Intelligence committee staffers have the authority to ask the CIA for documents and testimony about classified missions like the support for the Zero Units under the broad national security law known as Title 50.

    Congressional officials said the two oversight committees are ill-equipped to monitor the complexities of paramilitary operations in foreign countries. The Pentagon and State Department have created entire bureaucracies to make sure foreign units meet the requirements of the Leahy Law. The intelligence oversight committees, with their relatively small staffs, are not set up to track what’s happening on the ground when U.S. military officers on loan to the CIA work with elite units in the hinterlands of Afghanistan, Somalia or Syria.

    “The sense I get from former operators is they don’t give a shit,” said one congressional source. “Their attitude is, the world’s dangerous and you partner with bad people, that’s why we have Title 50.”

    Congressional staffers said they believed the failure of Congress to extend the Leahy Law to intelligence agencies was no coincidence.

    “I mean, it’s a huge and intentional gap,” one said. “It’s designed to not have oversight; it is meant to not be under the public view.”

    In his email, Leahy said an amendment to the Leahy Law, which would expand the scope to certain counter-terrorism operations, is now in the works.

    The lack of consequences for blatant human rights violations, he said, “foments anger and resentment toward the U.S., undermines our mission in these countries where we need the support of the local population, and weakens our credibility as a country that supports the rule of law and accountability.”

    Stephen Engelberg contributed reporting.

    This post was originally published on Articles and Investigations – ProPublica.

  • Asia Pacific Report

    Peace campaigners, activists and Nuclear-Free and Independent Pacific stalwarts were among those who gathered in Auckland this evening to celebrate publication of a new book dedicated to the remarkable mahi of the late international peace researcher Owen Wilkes.

    This Auckland launch of Peacemonger at Grey Lynn’s Trades Hall was the second of three such events following one in Christchurch last week and a third planned for Wellington on February 24.

    Speakers included three of the four Auckland contributors to the book — event organiser Maire Leadbeater, Dr Bob Mann and Dr David Robie — with the fourth, Dr Peter Wills, sending his apologies. Dr Robie also shared a message from Swedish researcher Paul Claesson.

    Guest speakers Bob Woodward and Lyn Hume reflected on the Peace Movement and the remarkable achievements over many years.

    Activist musician Roger Fowler rounded off the evening with a performance.

    Photographs: Del Abcede/WILPF and APR

    • Peacemonger: Owen Wilkes: International peace researcher, edited by May Bass and Mark Derby. Wellington: Raekaihau Press, 196 pages. $35. ISBN 978-1-99-115386-9

     

  • Peacemonger, the new book published last month to celebrate the life and work of peace researcher and activist Owen Wilkes (1940-2005), is being launched in Auckland on Friday. Here a close friend from Sweden — not featured in the book — remembers his mentor in both New Zealand and Scandinavia.


    COMMENT: By Paul Claesson in Stockholm

    I got to know Owen Wilkes through friends in 1980, when as a 22-year-old student I ended up in a housing collective where his ex-partner lived. He was then at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), having recently arrived from the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), and was, in addition to his collaboration with Nils-Petter Gleditsch, already in full swing with his Foreign Military Presence project.

    He hired me as an assistant with responsibility for Spanish and Portuguese-language source material.

    During this time I got to know Søren MC and Kirsten Bruun in Copenhagen, who had recently launched the magazine Försvar — Militärkritiskt Magasin. I contributed a couple of articles and was then invited to participate in the editorial team.

    Peacemonger cover
    Peacemonger . . . the first full-length account of peace researcher Owen Wilkes’ life and work. Image: Raekaihau Press

    A theme issue about the American bases in Greenland grew into a book, Greenland — The Pearl of the Mediterranean, which apparently caused considerable consternation in the Ministry of Greenland. The book resulted in a hearing in Christiansborg.

    I was also responsible for a theme issue about the DEW (Early Warning Line) and Loran C facilities on the Faroe Islands. I was in Stockholm when SÄPO’s spy target against Owen started, and I was there the whole way.

    SÄPO interrogated me a couple of times, and at one point during the trial, when I took the opportunity to hand out relevant material about Owen’s research — all publicly available — to journalists in the audience, I was visibly thrown out of the case by a couple of angry young men from FSÄK (the security service of the Swedish defence establishment).

    Distorted by media
    Owen and I saw each other almost every day — sometimes I stayed with him in his little cabin in Älvsjö — and together we wondered how his various activities, such as his innocent fishing trip in Åland, were distorted in the media by FSÄK and the prosecutor’s care (SÄPO had subsequently begun to show greater doubt about Owen’s guilt).

    In 1984-85, after he had been expelled from Sweden, I was Owen’s house guest at his farm in Karamea, Mahoe Farm, on New Zealand’s West Coast, at the northern end of the road. He was in the process of selling it.

    With his brother Jack, he had started a commercial bee farm, and together we spent an intensive summer — harvesting bush honey, pollinating apple and kiwifruit orchards and building a small harvest house for the honey collection.

    In the meantime, we sold — or ate up — the farm’s remaining flock of sheep. When the farm was sold, we moved to Wellington — I was offered a room in the Quakers’ guest house, where I joined the work at Peace Movement Aotearoa’s premises on Pirie Street.

    Then Prime Minister David Lange had recently let New Zealand withdraw from ANZUS, as a result of his government’s refusal to allow US Navy ships to call at port unless they declared themselves disarmed of nuclear weapons.

    As a result, PMA organised a conference with the theme nuclear-free Pacific, with participants from all over the Pacific region. Together with Owen, Nicky Hager and others I contributed to the planning and execution of the conference.

    Surveying US signals intelligence
    Before this, Owen and Nicky had begun surveying American signals intelligence facilities in New Zealand. I took part in this, ie. with a couple of photo excursions to Tangimoana.

    Owen and I kept in touch after my return to Sweden. What I remember best from his letters from this time — apart from his musings about his work as a government defence consultant — are his often comical anecdotes about his adventures in the bush as a scout for the New Zealand Forest Service, where his task was mainly to map Māori cultural remains before they were chewn to pieces by the forest industry.

    His sudden death took a toll. I got the news from his partner May Bass. I would have liked to have flown to NZ to attend the memorial services for him, but ironically they coincided with my wedding.

    Owen played a very big role in my life. I admired him, and miss him all the time. More than anyone else I have known, he deserves to be remembered in writing. I was therefore very happy when I heard about the time and energy devoted to this book project. My sincere gratitude.